Comments on: Stacks of books are disappearing

By: stormy

stormy — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:21:55 +0000

I wonder if anyone’s done a study about what people prefer to listen to
versus read?
I always prefer reading a book over listening to it. However, I listen to a
lot because I can listen while exercising and driving. I tend to get
nonfiction books but I find the fiction ones much, much easier to listen to.
(But then I find them easier to read too.
I’m often really tempted to buy the audio version of the book I’m reading
just so I can continue it during my walk or in the car. I haven’t so far.
Figuring out where I am in the audio version is one of the main reasons
(after cost.)
FYI, I did try the text-to-speech option on the Kindle 2. I think I’d only
use it in an emergency. It was hard to follow without all the right
intonations.

By: Ed Dodds

Ed Dodds — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 14:09:00 +0000

Stormy:
I think one of things I’ve discovered after a childhood hanging out in school libraries is that I enjoy listening to some kinds of info (strategy books, trends, etc.) while some things (a new programming language, perhaps) I usually read. I subscribe to audiotech.com, audible.com and really wish there were more O’Reilly books in audio format (don’t know if Libraries for the Blind encode their stuff in a proprietary format or not). I can’t find theological reference material readily available in audio (which is ironic given the history of sermons). I found literacy bridge which is cool because it takes seriously the fact that most people who can’t read learning to read require audio – http://www.literacybridge.org/

By: Jon Stumpf

Jon Stumpf — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 09:27:49 +0000

I am nostalgic for the "stacks" of the Rush Rhees library where I studied at the University of Rochester and will always appreciate the grandeur of any large library of books. However, even this library had limits to its collection and accessing out-of-library books were difficult. The issue at hand, in my opinion, is one of efficiency (or value) of library in how it delivers knowledge to readers/consumers. Robert Cringley mentioned the Cushing Academy decision on his blog (http://www.cringely.com/2009/09/burn-baby-burn/ ) and he wonders "why they need a building or even a room at all." This blog entry goes on to question the huge expense of higher education similar to one Gary North posted last month (http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north748.html ).

By: John M

John M — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 17:17:17 +0000

I still read books, and much like you, get the majority of them from Amazon for two reasons. One, again like you, the library usually doesn’t have what I want and second because Borders Express usually wants an arm and a leg for the same book I can get on Amazon for a lower price, many times even including the shipping charges (if any). Besides, with the store being as little as it is (thus the “Express” – it’s still a Borders, just 500 times smaller) I don’t recall ever seeing a copy of “Practical Programming” or many other books of that ilk on the shelves.

By: dmarti.livejournal.com

dmarti.livejournal.com — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 08:17:28 +0000

The physical plant and the payroll are squeezing out the collections budget. San Francisco’s library is probably the worst offender: they built a $140 million palace, with a cafe and plenty of space useful for fundraising events, that actually had fewer feet of shelves than the previous building. (And when I looked for a woodworking book, they had one that covered table saws before the introduction of commonly used safety devices and techniques. Apparently the deluxe atrium is more important to the library board than the readers’ fingers.)
The collection, for a library, is like the schedule for a transit system. Run too few buses or acquire too few books and you lose the mid-range customers who have the option of driving or buying the book.

By: stormy

stormy — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:46:19 +0000

Agreed.
And what bothers me is the assumption that once the protocol is digital, everyone will start reading again.

By: stormy

stormy — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:45:54 +0000

I’m not worried about the stacks disappearing. I’m worried that people are getting rid of them without understanding why people aren’t using them.
Maybe they aren’t using them because they aren’t allowed to bring their coffee into the library. I don’t know. But getting rid of them because “people prefer to read digital media” seems to be an assumption based on very little fact.

By: Bob Bobson

Bob Bobson — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:38:59 +0000

Why do you care about stacks of books disappearing? If the text went i’d be worried, but it’s not going anywhere. People are just reading in different ways. If you happen to want some text in a book, perhaps we could use print on demand.

By: Bob Bobson

Bob Bobson — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:22:01 +0000

I think the problem with the way we are thinking about it is that we are confusing literature, the content that we are discussing, with books, which are just a delivery medium. Whether people read literature in a book, or on a website, a kindle, an iPhone, makes no difference.
It really irritates me when I see “book reviews”. Are you reviewing the paper? The construction of the spine? What you’re discussing is the literature.
It’s like if someone invented a new network protocol and then everyone moaned that nobody was “reading TCP” anymore.