/lit/ - Literature

>not the same as holding a real book?

Well...ya know, it's not. I wouldn't say it's destroying literature, but it's not the same as holding a real book.

its not. the same way mp3 didn't kill music. but unlike other media which are skewing towards purely digital, I hope I'll always have the option to read a physical book

So what do you guys think is better, don't want to make a new thread to ask, the kindle or the Nook?

I'd tell them that obviously it's not the same as holding a real book, but it has made literature even more accessible to the masses. And I don't see how getting more people to read is destroying literature.

>>2865775

By giving plebs more access to literature, you're saturating the market with a bunch of dumb sacks of shit that wouldn't know a decent book from their collective assholes. Therefore, more shit-tier books will be published because shit-tier books are in demand.

I disagree with them on only their first point.

you are 11

Ivory tower. Can't hear you over all my prejudice way up here in my tower OP, real books or go home.

>>2865781
Increasing demand for one thing doesn't always mean that the demand for other things will decrease. Everyone who enjoys real literature is still out there expecting more.

Well... I love books but this is convenient too. Also, I've got a ton of on paper books at home so you can piss off.

I think it's stupid, we found a more efficient way to store and read books. Sure there is the pleasure of tradition and nostalgia (which I also find myself enjoying) but e-readers are better because they take less space and can do more (depending on the model of course).

It's like if the ancients back then would have said:
"These papyrus are destroying the art of telling a story, back in my days we needed for someone to count us the story we couldn't read it by ourself."

As for the point >>2865781
has raised I think that bad popular books have always existed and have always been in bigger demand than good books. We I see someone with Twilight or 50 Shades of Grey or whatever bullshit is popular these days. I see them having it in a book. I think that the market for e-readers is for more avid readers and the "plebs" stay with the traditional book since they don't like enough book or read enough to buy one. So the e-reader doesn't help them getting those kinds of book.

>>2865818

second, but i disagree with the last point you made. as soon as it is popular to have an e-reader (so edgy(nerdy/whatever) everyone wants to have one.

Nod sagely in agreement

>>2865830
Yes the masses will follow the current, although I don't think that the e-reader will ever become popular enough is that sense. What is and will be more and more popular are tablet (only the iPad actually) and these devices have many more functions. And I think that the iAmamindlesssheep will be too distracted by games, facebook and twitter to read on their devices.

>>2865830
Although I agree that the masses will follow that trend. I don't think that they will buy an e-reader. They are more likely to buy an iPad (I would have said tablet, but we all know they won't buy something that's not from apple).

And with such devices, they will be too distracted by games, facebook, twitter and instagram to read. So I don't think that they will be demanding more books.

say what you will about the quality of e-ink displays, I still find it hard to read from any sort of screen.

Tell them that they're ignorant and hindering society's progression.

>>2865781

You have no idea what you're talking about. You fit right in on /lit/.

I tell them that I don't give a fuck, it gives me what I want, when I want it. Future generations be damned.

>inb4 I'm so edgy I'm a circle.

>Not reading enough books where it would be too expensive to buy every book you want to read
>2012

Nigga, thank god for libraries.

>>2865922
Out of interest, why? They look identical, the only difference is tactile.

i tell them to go fuck themselves. literature is the words, not the medium. you can have a sonnet as pixels on a screen, printed in toilet paper or written in the sand on a beach and it's still a poem

>>2865947
This. Format is irrelevant, the amount of time spent arguing over which is best, another book or three could've been finished.

>>2865768
Kindle for e-ink, Nook for tablet

>>2865768
The only reason I don't buy a nook is due to the fact all of my books are in .mobi. Converting generally causes errors and getting them all again would be a pain in my japs eye.

>>2865795
Except the exact opposite has happened with music. I'd be willing to bet literature will be the same way.

>So what do you say when someone tells you owning an e-reader is destroying literature and not the same as holding a real book?
I will say: Shut up you Pansy Faggot Communist Hipster, I'll buy whatever I want with MY MONEY, you fucking closeted self-righteous facist pinko.

I agree with him and give him a brofist

>>2865758
I agree with them.

>>2865758
Unless pirating e-books and whatnot actually hurts authors' profits, I can't see how having a more accessible medium to view literature on could have any negative affect on the institution as a whole.

That being said, I still prefer books. They've a relatively pleasant smell and don't strain my eyes. I also like to get away from technology every so often, and reading is an ideal time for that.

e-readers are not destroying literature, you andropausic idiots. That's like saying mp3 is destroying music, 3d printing is destroying sculpture or that Photoshop is destroying graphic arts.

Back in Gutemberg's day, every vecchi-type old-media facist thought "good culture" was over(apocalyptics), because anyone with enough chutzpah could get his/her book printed, so the world was over, (yea, sure, renaissance or whatever.)

Back in the old radio golden era, other bunch of apocalyptics thought that both literature and music was over, because nobody will either pay for music, or buy books anymore, see a pattern here?

Think outside the box, guys...

PROTIP & PIC RELATED: read this book and let out the stale air inside your heads...

>>2865947
actually, depending upon the context of the poem, the medium which it is printed upon may contain meaning. street art wouldn't have the meaning it does if it was all done on a canvas. and think of all the post-modern books which actually utilize physical pages in weird ways. shit like having pages that can be ripped out or used as playing cards. although it isn't an aspect of literature used often, the physical medium of paper is still something that would be missing and not be able to be utilized with e-readers

>>2866047
was this ever translated into english?

>actually, depending upon the context of the poem, the medium which it is printed upon may contain meaning.
That's called multimedia or installation of performance, Literature is about words, and glyphs are the media

> street art wouldn't have the meaning it does if it was all done on a canvas. and think of all the post-modern books which actually utilize physical pages in weird ways.
Dude, people still buy statues because they want a fucking statue, they don't buy a TV or a poster to show statues...

> shit like having pages that can be ripped out or used as playing cards.
Sure, so is that still literature? duh

> although it isn't an aspect of literature used often,
Because it's not literature, a piece of human feces attached to a book is not literature, it's a prop.

> the physical medium of paper is still something that would be missing and not be able to be utilized with e-readers
Actually, there are flexible e-ink paper displays, not yet into comercial production but they will soon.

But for a pretentious adversarial hipster , nothing is hip enough NEVER!

>>2866081
That's called multimedia or installation of performance, Literature is about words, and glyphs are the media
so if a poem is written in a book it's literature but if it's written on a napkin it's multimedia?

>Dude, people still buy statues because they want a fucking statue, they don't buy a TV or a poster to show statues...
I have no idea what you're trying to convey here.

>Sure, so is that still literature? duh
once again I'm confused as to what you're even saying. are you saying that if a book has pages which can intentionally be taken out, it's not literature?

>Because it's not literature, a piece of human feces attached to a book is not literature, it's a prop
now you're exaggerating to make your position seem more legitimate. but moreso than that, even if something like ripping pages out of a book isn't "literature", that doesn't mean it devoid of value. call it whatever you want but it can still have meaning, even if it's not 'literature'

>Actually, there are flexible e-ink paper displays, not yet into comercial production but they will soon.
until I see what is able to be done with something like this (in terms of actually adding to a stories meaning or value) I don't really care

>>2866081
>But for a pretentious adversarial hipster , nothing is hip enough NEVER!
Yes, I know what you are talking about. If it's not an incunable, I will not read it even if I get paid for... That shit people call "books" today aren't "real" books you know...

But you know, I have a buddy that only reads shit that's carved hieroglyphs in stone, fucking hipster will only accept birthday cards if they are cuneiform clay tablets.

Anyone who has a nook, the normal 6 inch black and white one, how does it handle viewing images?

I want to get one for reading books but i also read a few manga series, and i notice there is quite a lot of manga on the nook store but not any of the things i read, how easy is it to organize JPGs/PNGs, could i just extract my .cbz/.cbr files and put them in a folder (i.e. a folder titled "Berserk: Volume 27" full of PNGs in numbered page order) and easily view it that way?

>>2866109
>so if a poem is written in a book it's literature but if it's written on a napkin it's multimedia?
only if you want people to buy it on napkins from amazon, retarded faggot...

>are you saying that if a book has pages which can intentionally be taken out, it's not literature?
Is something that you read from a screen less literary? Books as media is different shit from literature, narrow-minded reductionist.

>now you're exaggerating to make your position seem more legitimate.
I will write whatever I want to expose the idiocy of a statement as: "e-readers are destroying literature".

> even if something like ripping pages out of a book isn't "literature", that doesn't mean it devoid of value
Sure, but that value is not inherent of the physical media, So you'll not read Plato but only if you read it from a papyrus?

>call it whatever you want but it can still have meaning, even if it's not 'literature'
A movie is still a movie if it's on Beta, vhs, film, dvd, divx, etc. And a play is still a play if it's done by puppeters or actors. Art is art, so it's still important in any media, but literature is obviously not irremediably linked to books, so either any artistic expression.


Meaning and value are irrelevant of the media, so books can go fuck themselves I couldn't care less. But literature will still be important, e-readers, brain uploaded books, holographic thinga-fuck-giggly-shit, whatever.

also, thanks for the rage-fuuuuu moments exposing your idiocy, but I have to keep living my life.

So faggots thinking e-readers are destroying literature, I'll palm-face later LOL

>>2866057
>was this ever translated into english?

Yes it was.

http://www.mediafire.com/?quupcqqt80ublso

>>2866170
Now, all you book-fundamentalist patrician-wannabes little minds, go read it and culture yourselves, the world is not over, rapture-monglers.

>>2866163
I never said e-readers were destroying literature. I was arguing for the value that physical books can have over e-readers in some scenarios.

>only if you want people to buy it on napkins from amazon, retarded faggot...
I take it you've given up here?

>Is something that you read from a screen less literary? Books as media is different shit from literature, narrow-minded reductionist.
why are you avoiding my question? I don't even know what you're trying to prove by saying this. Something you read from a screen is not less literary, I'm saying that if the author desired, they could accomplish things with physical paper a screen wouldn't allow them to do

>Sure, but that value is not inherent of the physical media, So you'll not read Plato but only if you read it from a papyrus?
huh?

>Art is art, so it's still important in any media, but literature is obviously not irremediably linked to books, so either any artistic expression.
I never said literature is only literature if it's on physical paper. I'm just saying there are things which can be done with physical books that one cannot do with screens.

>>2866191
So captain obvious and his twin brother are arguing at intarwebs.

>hurr durr, people will keep buying books because only books are books
>herp derp, Literature are not books, books are not literature. Picture books has no words derp.
>Don't know what you're talking about
>faggit
>No U, answer me, only books are books, and that's their value, because only books can be books.

Stupid thread.

>>2866170
As far as I know, Apocalypse Postponed(1994) is only a partial English translation of Apocalittici e integrati(1964)

It doesn't destroy literature. I would say that it kills good typography though.

>>2866317
>I would say that it kills good typography though.
so, audiobooks oh my fucking god no!! what have you done, you fucking barbarian plebs!!!
/sarcasm

Also, good typography will never die, it has been around the last 5k years, some say even earlier. So I couldn't worry less.

Regardless of whether they are "destroying literature," there just isn't anything like spotting a novel in the corner of a bookstore or ripping a doorstopper from a package you picked up from your front door. Much of the experience outside of reading the actual book is lost when using the e-reader format.

>>2866344
>Much of the experience outside of reading the actual book is lost when using the e-reader format.
So you read a book not for the words in it, but for it's smell, texture, atoms and mass.

Sure, I know of guys who only can get an erection when their asses engulfs their dominatrix heel, it's called fetichism dude...
It's related to being a fucking neurotic moron, you know, haha.

>>2866354
Man, he wrote:
>Much of the experience outside of reading the actual book
tu Comprende hombre?

wow, /lit/ confirmed for a bunch of ignorant luddites

>>2865775

>but it has made literature even more accessible to the masses

How? The only people affording e-readers already had access to books.

>>2866387
only the 13 year old ones, you know, they have a pose to keep... people to impress... inmature people to impress...

>>2866391
Masses? What's a Plebeian? Who would read 50 shades of gray after Twilight trilogy.

LOL, when ugly-minded people do the same hobby than you, hahaha.

>>2866399

What?

I was saying that the only people buying e-readers are already into reading.

I don't think that e-readers destroy literature; that is just stupid because it actually will help to disseminate it and preserve it. But still, it really isn't the same as holding a real book :p I doubt I'll ever get an e-reader because I like pages and the e-readers are just way too sterile.

>>2866415
And.... That's such a relieve isn't!!

God, imagine people into chastity buying sex toys, now, that would be quite, er, out of the norm...

>>2865781
have you been to the bookstore lately? The debasement of literature has already happened XD I don't think it can get any worse.

I've always been against e-readers, but i'm thinking of buying one now. I like the real books because I like the cover art and having a collection. But when it comes to larger books it's really annoying reading a small paperback of a 1000 page book, the print seems really small and holding the book open is uncomfortable.

>>2865818
E-readers are also probably more environmentally friendly =p But on the downside, you can't fill a bookcase with them. and I <3 my bookcase.

>>2866427
>implying it had been different in a past golden era when every dulltard Plebeian read Aristotle and Virgil...

>>2866440
I agree with you. I love mine too.

But some friends feel the same about their virtual bookcases, call it virtual fetishism, but their eyes get bright in the same way when showing their reading app to me than me showing them my bookcase. inb4 somebody namecalling "hipster".

>>2866425

Alright, enough of your babbling.

>>2866081
Books are multimedia then. Covers, pictures and even the smell of the pages are part of the experience; buying a book isn't just about words.

>>2866451
>Alright, enough of your babbling.
So that's what you say when you cannot handle sarcasm or opposition?

Poor little thing, go back to fantasy world, you'll feel better.

But don't worry, we'll not judge you for rigidity, or parents for being so imperative and strict about your opinions, but you'd better not keep mirroring their behaviors if you don't want people to judge it, hahaha.

Holding a book shows you are reading so people can leave you the fuck alone/ask about your book. While an e-reader makes it seem like you are playing angry birds and people assume you are doing something worthless.

Honestly, I don't care what I'm using as long as it's a god book. A thing going for e-readers though, is that there's privacy to them, no one will/can judge by the cover/name of the book you are reading if you own an e-reader.

>>2866462

>So that's what you say when you cannot handle sarcasm or opposition?

Eh, it's really not that at all, it's more that it doesn't seem like English is your first language and I am having a hard time discerning what the fuck your point is. If you have one you should just state it plainly without trying to be clever.

>>2866466
>Holding a book shows you are reading so people can leave you the fuck alone/ask about your book.
pick one, you schizoid.

> While an e-reader makes it seem like you are playing angry birds and people assume you are doing something worthless.
So you are a pretentious poser, dude, that's nice, being like the 99% of the humanity.

Now, GTFO of /lit/ and never come back, you high school attention-craving drama-queen pseudo-intellectual emo fag.

>>2866469

>Honestly, I don't care what I'm using as long as it's a god book.

But those are the worst kind of book.

>>2866333

Of course typography will never die even if print does. Websites still require typography, as would any sort of app newspaper/magazine. It's just something I thought of recently while reading a book on the subject.

I just mean that on an e-reader being in control of the type is thrown out the window. The text scales depending on the screen size and orientation and I keep encountering e-books that for some reason do all kinds of stupid shit that make it hard to read sometimes.

>>2866476
Totally meant good.

>>2866475
well...

>>2866472
>Eh, it's really not that at all,
Well, you really were meaning it, so then why you wrote that if not meaning it.

> it's more that it doesn't seem like English is your first language and I am having a hard time discerning what the fuck your point is.
See, you are having a hard time, it's called not having a good reading comprenhension, with a pick of being trolled.

>If you have one you should just state it plainly without trying to be clever.
I'm being clever enough, you stay confused not because language is used in some way or other, but because you cannot keep the pace and the joke keeps staying on you. That's a good point and a tradition at large here at 4chan, so keep have a nice evening LOL.

>>2866449
I understand that. It's not the way I feel, but some people get excited about their digi-collections, and good for them. The important thing is that they're reading lol

>>2866490
So acknowledging haters means you acknowledge your poserism? Nice move kiddo, go read a book because of it's content and be less of a fucking poser.

PIC RELATED, book poser.

>>2866475
This is like the overreaction of the century XD you're the drama queen here.

>>2866491

You are a fucking mongoloid.

>>2866499
it's called trolling dude, keep feeding them, this thread had been a troll treasure trove since the beginning.

Also, sage

bump

>>2866500
>You are a fucking mongoloid.
Wow, now I feel like a fucking Genghis khan man... Thanks for the compliment. I knew you guys at 4chan weren't that bad, I really knew you can handle humor in a witty way without ad-hominen and name-calling. Man I'm so proud of you guys, so smart...

>>2866510

>>2866510
Look everybody, a flame war has ignited.

>>2866516
haha, man, are you still that much burning?

Love when so-called thoughtful people show their true bigoted and cheap name-calling being at internet, also, it's quite funny. You know, having extra chromosomes is so funny haha, such a clever guy you are, intellectually top of the crop. You even don't have to use words, in a place like /lit/, whoa.

>Haha, seriously, I'm having such a great time trolling, don't keep feeding me and be a better sport, gotta go to sleep soon LOL

>>2866541
Nah, fuck it, keep your thread, thanks for the laughs dudes.

>>2866541

>>2866522
>>2866522

first time i guneinly laughed in about a week. thank you for this.

ITT retards without a genetic excuse

They're missing out on millions of free books thanks to piracy.

No-one has ever said that to me. I used to own an ebook reader but it kept running out of charge so I stopped using it.

I don't read books published less than 50 years ago anyway.

>>2867120
>I used to own an ebook reader but it kept running out of charge so I stopped using it

0/10

Well I agree. The screen of my e-reader is way too dark. I've grown tired of using it and now solely read paper books again.

No, really. It was/is a Sony prs-505 or something. Nice leather binding but the battery would never stay charged.
If you google it apparently it's a common problem with that model. Well done, you're shit at telling when someone's trolling.

I don't think ereaders are a big deal and I can't believe people are still so self-absorbed that they concern themselves with what other people are using and judge them for it. I used to be really anti-ereader but then I realized it was a waste of time and energy.

I bought an ereader a few weeks ago and I think it's okay, but it's definitely no substitute for a physical copy. I have easy access to a lot more books now, but I acknowledge that I could've simply found hard copies of those books either through the library or from buying secondhand. It's just a matter of convenience I guess. I'm usually reading one book on the ereader while I'm on the shitter and then books I own or library books when I'm in my room or elsewhere.

People are forgetting that computers have been around for a long fucking time. PDFs of books have existed long before ereaders ever became popular. Just because ereaders are trying to emulate the appearance of book, people are suddenly making such a huge fucking deal about electronic books and the hardware used to read them.

Hopefully physical books will always stick around and won't explode in price but I don't see the problem with supplementing physical copies with electronic copies once in a while.

All I know is there are zero convenient libraries near me and buying is pointless as I'll never read a book more than once.

I tried using an e-reader on an ipod touch and it was utterly miserable. (screen size was irrelevant, backlit displays are eyerape)

Then a kindle falls into my lap and I read five books a week for three months.

Also, literature as a medium was already "destroyed" by the fact stephen king has more copies of his (enjoyable) crap in circulation than every "great" author combined.

Simple, you tell them it's the future. Do people still own VHS because dvds are "destroying film"? No, the media is not the art, it's just the media.

>>2867368

Marshall McLuhan would like to have a word with you.

accept it, apologize, get my e-reader, and break the screen with my keys.

>>2867421
>paying attention only to Mcluchans message and not to the medium through which he transmitted that message

>>2865766
This. I love being able to carry hundreds of books with me wherever I go and that there is no danger of a page falling out. But I miss the smell of old books, and i hope i can always find a physical copy.