Whether you view Amazon.com’s digital reader, Kindle, as a revolutionary device for accessing information or the logical next step in the evolution of reading, one thing is for sure: it merits intellectual discussion. In July of ’09, Dan Cohen, director of George Mason University’s Center for History and New Media, revealed in his “Digital Campus” podcast that the Princeton, Yale, and Oxford University Presses have made certain titles available in a digital format. In fact, these academic publishing powerhouses are moving aggressively to make a dent in the e-book market.
So, why is this big news in the world of digital scholarship and what are the advantages of offering electronic content? Will electronic availability ease the financial burdens of publishing “limited runs of paper books that might sit in a warehouse for years?” Well, for starters, it signals a shift away from being forced to publish “marginal sales” books on paper at a high cost. As Tom Scheinfeldt argues, the advantage of the Kindle for the university press is affordability . They can cheaply market books that have decreased in popularity on an as-needed basis. Moreover, students can sample more esoteric titles at an affordable price of $9.99. In this instance, the option of accessibility and affordability outweighs the tactile sensation book lovers point to in defending the traditional form. But creating university press backlogs is more of a long-term goal. Cohen points out that the academic titles released so far, and there have been several, are from prominent authors who have written high-demand books. A sensible business move? I believe so. Best to test the model before fully investing in its potential.
But what about the disadvantages? Mills Kelly suggests that Kindle will devastate campus bookstores, who annually rely on used book sales. Is the elimination of the used book market on campus worth the gamble of selling e-books? So far its too early to tell. I have yet to see the Kindle reach I-Pod level ubiquity on American University’s campus and hope it never will (although I hear the wait list for a Kindle at the university library is over six months). As a “stacks assistant,” physical books are my bread and butter and I doubt it takes 15 employees to organize electronic files.
IPad vs. Kindle: Revolution vs. Evolution
Point being, a primordial shift in how students, faculty, and the general public view scholarly content is underway, whether people like it or not. On the subject of e-readers as evolution or revolution, Mills Kelly is right when he says the way we view scholarly arguments does not change with the advent of the kindle. The linear form of the book is the same, even though the medium is technically new. But what about the IPad, Apple’s new “tablet,” which features an e-reader, video player, web browser, and more? I would argue that by marrying the worlds of portable e-reading and web navigation, Apple has created a revolutionary device that enables users to access novel forms of digital scholarship that merit the same level of respect as a breakthrough book or article.
Because IPad transcends Kindle’s linear form, offering web navigation and audio/video capabilities, the potential for viewing digital resources that embrace new scholarly methodologies, such as William Thomas and Edward Ayres’s “The Difference Slavery Made,” is endless. Sure, the IPhone has web browsing as well, but IPad’s screen size and resolution offer a far more enjoyable and user-friendly experience. As a tool for reading, or viewing scholarly work on a hand held device, I believe the IPad signals the future for accessing digital scholarship. If only, what Kelly calls, the “fussy and conservative” history departments who determine tenure track positions saw it the same way. Or does Tom have a point when he says that tenure doesn’t actually matter in the digital age?
What do you think?
No Responses to “Kindle to the Mac (‘s)”