Death of Book/Curwen Response

[Carlton Martz <cmartz@EEE.ORG>]

This is a follow-up to my post, "Is the Printed Book Dead?"  In this post,
I referred to remarks made by Thomas Curwen, Deputy Editor of the Los
Angeles Times Book Review, in a speech he made to California school
librarians.  In referring to his remarks, I did not reflect the full
context of his talk.  He pointed this out to me in an e-mail which he
requested I re-post to you.  I am happy to do this to further the
discussion about reading and technology.

Mr. Martz

The [indefatigable] Richard Guy pass[ed] onto me your essay regarding my
talk in front of the school library association.  Clearly you've chosen to
write with the same [rhetorical] flourish as I did on the morning of that
address, but unfortunately I feel you have mischaracterized what I said.
It is all the more unfortunate that in this wired age, errors of fact tend
to proliferate, and I am sorry that you attached my name to your error.

Yes, I did say that The Book Is Dead.  It was intended, however, only for
effect--something that comes across more easily when spoken than when
written down.  I had hoped to stir people up a little for that foggy, 8
0'clock hour.  I suppose I succeeded.

However I never did say, Long Live the E-Book, and I had hoped that by
bringing in a few of the books that I so dearly love--Joan of Arc, for
instance, in her many bookly ressurections--my statement regarding the
demise of the book might have been seen as something of [a] eulogy.

I also hoped that my talk was more nuanced than you portray.  After all, I
did present a picture of an emerging culture of reading that is expanding
at a remarkable rate: back-lists becoming readily available on-line,
readers more easily connecting with their favorite writers, the hegemony of
publishers--whose work chasing the bottom line has so dangerously narrowed
the number of books being published--breaking down.  And I did praise the
new Xerox printer that can print books (yes, printed pages) in less than 5
minutes.  All of which have important implications for book lovers and
readers.

As for children and reading, I agree entirely with you.  Printed books,
picture books, board books are the foundations of literacy, far more
compatible with the wiring in our brains than a computer screen.  (And as
the husband of a reading specialist in the Little Lake School District, I
can assure you that I know the [virtue] first-hand of books for young
reader[s].)  But--and perhaps you can agree with me as well--that as a
literate culture, our greatest challenge is bringing teenagers back to
reading, and if an ebook succeeds in this, then I have to applaud that.

Finally, I am sorry that the real point of my talk seems to have escaped
you.  Reading is the foundation of our civilization (and the hope for our
future).  Reading habits are changing.  Technology is, in part, driving
these changes, and the more we are aware of it, the more we can use it to
our benefit.

Sincerely,

Thomas Curwen
Deputy Editor
Los Angeles Times Book Review



This was my personal response to Mr. Curwen's e-mail.


Mr. Curwen,

I apologize if my words mischaracterized your talk.  Your intent was to get
us thinking and that you did.  The intent of my essay was not to report
your address but to use your provocative opening comments to set the
context for distinguishing between different kinds of reading and the
delivery systems that seem to be the best for each.  Unfortunately, there
are those today who are so swept along with technological innovation that
all they see is the "elevator" as the answer to everything.  My *Long live
the e-book!* comment was supposed to reflect a viewpoint I am hearing, and
not a quote specifically from your address.  I am sorry if this was not
clear.  I totally agree with your last sentence which reflects my view that
printed books and e-books, etc. will find their niches.  I do think
e-textbooks will be an improvement over the huge printed monstrosities that
are being published today, at least at the high school level.  Your talk
succeeded with me because it forced me to think about how the printed word
will appear differently in the future.  This also has important
implications for how we are going to have to teach reading to children:
both on the paper page and the hyperlinked screen.  Again, I apologize if I
unfairly made you a foil for the points I was trying to develop.

Carl Martz

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=
All postings to LM_NET are protected under copyright law.
To quit LM_NET (or set-reset NOMAIL or DIGEST), send email to:
listserv@listserv.syr.edu   In the message write EITHER:
1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST
4) SET LM_NET MAIL  * Please allow for confirmation from Listserv.
For LM_NET Help see: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/
Archives: http://askeric.org/Virtual/Listserv_Archives/LM_NET.html
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=