Comments on: Dear Nicholson Baker—Egad! http://www.teleread.com/robert-nagle/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/ News & views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:47:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Brian Jones http://www.teleread.com/robert-nagle/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/comment-page-1/#comment-1148128 Brian Jones Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:21:36 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/07/27/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/#comment-1148128 In response to Aaron Pressman, I'm glad that the New Yorker continues to allow, indeed encourage, Baker's 6000+ words. He is a fine writer, even if you disagree with his opinions. He notices the details, the minutiae that colour our lives. Mezzanine, Size of Thoughts, Double Fold - fabulous writing. His New Yorker piece demonstrates his natural curiosity and generosity of spirit. Even with the Kindle, he is enjoying himself by the end. A luddite? Perhaps, but probably not. Did you not read his words on the iTouch and reading in bed? Thoughtful fellows like Baker will always get a bilious reception from the neophyte blogosphere. I can't understand it myself - it's not as if the digerati are under threat from the rise of old tech is it? That's why Robert Nagle can afford to say "So What?" and "Who cares?". Well, a few souls out there do seem to care, and good on them for daring to suggest there is more to life than grey on grey. Personally, I would love to buy an ereader, but not until it can handle all file formats thrown at it. In response to Aaron Pressman, I’m glad that the New Yorker continues to allow, indeed encourage, Baker’s 6000+ words. He is a fine writer, even if you disagree with his opinions. He notices the details, the minutiae that colour our lives. Mezzanine, Size of Thoughts, Double Fold – fabulous writing. His New Yorker piece demonstrates his natural curiosity and generosity of spirit. Even with the Kindle, he is enjoying himself by the end.
A luddite? Perhaps, but probably not. Did you not read his words on the iTouch and reading in bed? Thoughtful fellows like Baker will always get a bilious reception from the neophyte blogosphere. I can’t understand it myself – it’s not as if the digerati are under threat from the rise of old tech is it? That’s why Robert Nagle can afford to say “So What?” and “Who cares?”. Well, a few souls out there do seem to care, and good on them for daring to suggest there is more to life than grey on grey.
Personally, I would love to buy an ereader, but not until it can handle all file formats thrown at it.

]]> By: Robert Nagle http://www.teleread.com/robert-nagle/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/comment-page-1/#comment-1113028 Robert Nagle Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:53:41 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/07/27/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/#comment-1113028 If given a choice between a print book and ebooks, most people would choose print books (all other things being equal). The examples which Baker used to illustrate lack of ebook availability are easily and cheaply available as print books. Despite the fact that I think Baker missed the point about several things, he has a knack for identifying trivial details which people care about. If given a choice between a print book and ebooks, most people would choose print books (all other things being equal). The examples which Baker used to illustrate lack of ebook availability are easily and cheaply available as print books.

Despite the fact that I think Baker missed the point about several things, he has a knack for identifying trivial details which people care about.

]]> By: Dan Brookes http://www.teleread.com/robert-nagle/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/comment-page-1/#comment-1112928 Dan Brookes Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:16:35 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/07/27/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/#comment-1112928 I don't know how you can dismiss as irrelevant Baker's point that many books aren't available for the Kindle. Who cares, you ask? This is a huge source of frustration to many e-book users and would-be users. I also find it interesting how some people are so upset by Baker's article. He didn't write it for e-book experts or readers of this website! I don’t know how you can dismiss as irrelevant Baker’s point that many books aren’t available for the Kindle. Who cares, you ask? This is a huge source of frustration to many e-book users and would-be users. I also find it interesting how some people are so upset by Baker’s article. He didn’t write it for e-book experts or readers of this website!

]]> By: Aaron Pressman http://www.teleread.com/robert-nagle/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/comment-page-1/#comment-1112096 Aaron Pressman Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:17:13 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/07/27/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/#comment-1112096 I can't believe the New Yorker allowed 6,000+ words of this dated, tedious tripe into their magazine, sad to say. I used to sort of like Nicholson, particularly his quixotic quest to preserve old newspapers (bet you a coke he has no idea that Google has gone back and scanned all kinds of old newspapers). But he went way, way off the rails with his outrageous "history" of World War II that basically blamed the allies for the war and the the holocaust. In this particular essay, Nicholson spills endless verbiage on Kindle advertising, the box it comes in, the capital-raising history of the company that makes the screen technology, quotes from two-year old negative reviews of the Kindle 1, and on and on. The history and uses of a Kindle for people living in caves? It's just positively weird that 2 years after the Kindle came out, it's worth publishing in the New Yorker that it doesn't display color graphics well, there are no page numbers, not every great author's back list is available and that the black on gray screen isn't everyone's cup of tea. Blech, blech and triple blech! Not to mention, a supremely lost opportunity to consider the new possibilities of ebooks: the formerly invisible public domain works now available, the indexing and note-taking capabilities, the ways that the addition of simple and free web connectivity enhances reading of historical non-fiction, the opportunities for unknown authors to bypass the whole publishing industry and on and on. I can’t believe the New Yorker allowed 6,000+ words of this dated, tedious tripe into their magazine, sad to say. I used to sort of like Nicholson, particularly his quixotic quest to preserve old newspapers (bet you a coke he has no idea that Google has gone back and scanned all kinds of old newspapers). But he went way, way off the rails with his outrageous “history” of World War II that basically blamed the allies for the war and the the holocaust.

In this particular essay, Nicholson spills endless verbiage on Kindle advertising, the box it comes in, the capital-raising history of the company that makes the screen technology, quotes from two-year old negative reviews of the Kindle 1, and on and on. The history and uses of a Kindle for people living in caves?

It’s just positively weird that 2 years after the Kindle came out, it’s worth publishing in the New Yorker that it doesn’t display color graphics well, there are no page numbers, not every great author’s back list is available and that the black on gray screen isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. Blech, blech and triple blech!

Not to mention, a supremely lost opportunity to consider the new possibilities of ebooks: the formerly invisible public domain works now available, the indexing and note-taking capabilities, the ways that the addition of simple and free web connectivity enhances reading of historical non-fiction, the opportunities for unknown authors to bypass the whole publishing industry and on and on.

]]> By: Chris Meadows http://www.teleread.com/robert-nagle/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/comment-page-1/#comment-1111939 Chris Meadows Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:30:59 +0000 http://www.teleread.org/2009/07/27/dear-nicholson-bakeregad/#comment-1111939 Reading the article, I'm reminded of the bit from <i>The Matrix</i> wherein the kid explains to Neo that there is no spoon, and that you're not really bending the spoon but bending <i>yourself.</i> In the same way, I think a lot of Nicholson Baker's problems with the Kindle are not with the Kindle <i>qua</i> Kindle, but with himself. He lets the Kindle's ergonomic glitches distract him from getting caught up in the book. But, as the last paragraph shows, when he's caught up in the book already the Kindle just "disappears." Reading the article, I’m reminded of the bit from The Matrix wherein the kid explains to Neo that there is no spoon, and that you’re not really bending the spoon but bending yourself.

In the same way, I think a lot of Nicholson Baker’s problems with the Kindle are not with the Kindle qua Kindle, but with himself. He lets the Kindle’s ergonomic glitches distract him from getting caught up in the book. But, as the last paragraph shows, when he’s caught up in the book already the Kindle just “disappears.”

]]>