Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why Beatrix Potter Would Love a Digital Reader

Posted by timothy on from the bunny-centerfold dept.

destinyland writes "In 1906, children's book author Beatrix Potter tried creating her own new, non-book format for delivering her famous fairy tales. 'Intended for babies and tots, the story was originally published on a strip of paper that was folded into a wallet, closed with a flap, and tied with a ribbon.' This article includes a link to actual images from one of Potter's strange wallet-sized stories — 'The Story of A Fierce, Bad Rabbit' — plus an image showing you exactly what Beatrix Potter thought 'a fierce, bad rabbit' would look like!"

26 of 98 comments (clear)

  1. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    err okay. Who cares?

    1. Re:huh? by Okonomiyaki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody. But if anyone did, they'd immediately find the premise of the article ridiculous. Good luck teaching a baby to use a Kindle. Also, I doubt babies would be interested in monochrome rabbits.

      I used to have an ereader, not a kindle but similar, and I liked it a lot until it broke. But I really don't see why anyone would choose a kindle or similar device over an iPad. Am I missing something?

    2. Re:huh? by Lunatrik · · Score: 3, Informative

      E-ink for me, but I think I might be in a minority. LED reading for >3 hours gives me a heck of a headache....

    3. Re:huh? by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't know about the kindle, but an iPhone doesn't seem to be too hard. I was at a theme park the other day and the guy in front of my was carrying a baby that couldn't talk yet. It was holding his iPhone and I watched the baby repeated slide-unlock his iPhone, then wait for it to reset, and hit the button and unlock it again. Granted, it didn't manage to get the slide-unlock every time. It took about 4 tries. But there was no doubt that the kid had a good handle on what it was doing.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    4. Re:huh? by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Informative

      But I really don't see why anyone would choose a kindle or similar device over an iPad. Am I missing something?

      E-ink. Really, its a lot nicer on the eyes than an LCD, yeah, some people can stare at text on an LCD with no problem, but for me, I tend to get headaches staring at an LCD for too long. I can handle short articles, videos, etc. just fine but when I read a large wall of text that takes more than 15 minutes to read, I tend to get a headache.

      Plus, iPads are completely overpriced, you can get a cheap E-reader for $130 and a great one for $250, a cheap laptop for $350 and a great one for $500. With an iPad you have none of the benefits of E-ink nor the benefits of a real laptop.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    5. Re:huh? by maxume · · Score: 2, Informative

      Exactly. Why would I buy a Sony Reader rather than an Ipad? $350 of beer.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:huh? by greenguy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Also, I doubt babies would be interested in monochrome rabbits.

      Actually, for their first several months, babies prefer black and white to color. As a proud new papa, I can assure you it's true.

      With that in mind, I thought for a long time that it was dumb that more baby stuff didn't come in black and white, instead of all these pastels. Then I figured out: spit-up washes out of pastels easier than black and white.

      In much the same vein, I strongly suspect spit-up washes out of a pamphlet-book more easily than a digital reader.

      --
      What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
    7. Re:huh? by DeadboltX · · Score: 4, Informative

      Kindle is for reading books. iPad is for multimedia entertainment.

      Reading a novel for hours on a backlit screen makes my eyes feel like they are bleeding. Even a half hour before bedtime will keep my head buzzing enough to where it is more difficult to get to sleep, and decrease the quality of the sleep.

      E-Paper devices are perfect for reading because they are not backlit and reflect natural light almost like paper, so it is readable anywhere paper is readable (Try reading an iPad on a sunny day at the beach...)

    8. Re:huh? by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's actually a setting on the iPad to increase the power of the Reality Distortion Field (TM). Once it's up high enough you won't even notice the eye strain.

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    9. Re:huh? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's even more amusing if you know why she wanted the weird format in the first place: it was so the "book" could be printed in fewer runs through the press, so she could have color on more pages, and still be affordable.

      So yea, she'd have hated the Kindle. I personally hate the Kindle because it's a single function device, and because the ebook format is still so overpriced.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  2. WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Shouldn't this be in idle?

  3. What? by BonquiquiShiquavius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe I'm missing something, but what is the link between publishing a book in a pamphlet style and a love for digital readers?

    1. Re:What? by JeffSh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What he said, tenuous link at best. slow news day, stupid conclusions, etc etc.

    2. Re:What? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. It appears that Ms. Potter wanted a different experience for the readers, one that included a very tactile experience. That's the exact opposite of a digital reader.

    3. Re:What? by jd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Beatrix Potter was clearly interested in the telling of stories and was including the medium as part of the story, not something independent and transposable. As best as I can tell, it relates to eBooks only in that Beatrix would have used eBooks for stories that called specifically for an eBook format. In other words, she would neither be afraid of the format NOR use it merely because it existed. If it would be important, it would be used. If it wouldn't be important, it wouldn't be used. Since I cannot see any way in which it could be important to any of her work, I can't see any circumstance in which she would prefer it.

      (Considering the medium to be intrinsic is very alien to much of modern thinking, which portrays the medium as merely the mechanism by which information is delivered, not information in is own right, or metadata for the interpreting of information.)

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:What? by jmichaelg · · Score: 2, Funny

      You missed that it was a Timothy post. He tends to fall for PR flak nonsense.

  4. Uh... by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 2, Funny

    What're you doing with that carrot, Peter. No, wait, no, seriously, man, ...

  5. Zappa by dn15 · · Score: 4, Funny

    In related news experts say Frank Zappa would have used Linux.

  6. Amazon pays a pretty penny for buzz by heptapod · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Oh Amazon! I may be a luddite but at least my books will still function after the collapse of civilization.

    I know with my books I can bump them, drop them, get them wet (protip: freeze wet books so they dry out and don't puff up) and even SHARE them with other people. Sadly they're not fireproof.

    With a kindle I have a single electronic gadget full of books that Amazon and publishers can recall at any time for any reason.

    Beatrix Potter's book 'alternative', and calling it an alternative is quite a stretch but anything's possible if you pay off the right blogs, has all of the flexibility of the dead tree format and none of the drawbacks of some proprietary e-format laden with DRM.

    She was being creative and nowhere near trying to introduce a new format which would supercede a content delivery system which has been proven over the course of centuries not a mere handful of years.

    1. Re:Amazon pays a pretty penny for buzz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Got a book wet once. Used a hair dryer on it and then ironed it on the lowest setting. Now I can't remember which book it was, I can't tell.

  7. What, no colour? by scdeimos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    TFA talks about how Beatrix Potter would love the *Kindle*, not just any old reader. I think the author missed the fact that her watercolour illustrations include colour, something the Kindle can't do yet.

  8. Not necessarily digital readers, but... by weston · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Maybe I'm missing something, but what is the link between publishing a book in a pamphlet style and a love for digital readers?

    It's a leap, but it's not as big as you think. It's not so much that Beatrix Potter was pining away for the day when you could have a book that changed what its only page looked like rather than having to flip pages. It's that she conceived of another way of presenting the story other than the conventional book form, and that shows she was more likely to embrace other non-conventional forms.

    To belabor the point a bit, it might be worth noting that the form she chose is at least marginally more portable and multifunctional to boot.

    --
    Tweet, tweet.
    1. Re:Not necessarily digital readers, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      t's a leap, but it's not as big as you think. It's not so much that Beatrix Potter was pining away for the day when you could have a book that changed what its only page looked like rather than having to flip pages. It's that she conceived of another way of presenting the story other than the conventional book form, and that shows she was more likely to embrace other non-conventional forms.

      It's a bigger leap than you are making it out to be.

      Potter simply understood that children experience books more from a tactile standpoint, as opposed to adults who approach them primarily from a visual standpoint. All of her 'alternate' book formats were designed to appeal to young children's tactile needs, as opposed to simply being a medium which conveys information.

      So it's highly unlikely she would have bothered with any kind of e-reader at all, unless someone released one which could be chewed, bitten, hammered with, hammered upon, thrown, stacked, immersed in liquid, scratched, sniffed, folded, ripped, colored on, etc.

      Or to put it another way, Potter experimented heavily with alternative mediums since it is the medium itself which is important to children. E-readers are almost entirely opposite of this idea- the intent of an E-reader is to present a VERY 'generic' physical medium, the focus is on the content. And that's just not how kids learn and experience life.

  9. Epic Fail... by thesupraman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These people obviously dont have young children.

    Young children dont *read* books, that is about the 5th to 6th use of them.
    #1 is they eat books (chew on them whenever possible)
    #2 is they use books as hammers (apparently hitting things with large flat objects is fun!)
    #3 is they throw them the moment they are more than 5 inches above the ground

    Can someone lend me a kindle (/ipad/whatever) and a stopwatch? I have an experiment in mind...

    I suspect Ms.Potters idea was more about making books MORE disposable, not less (the foldups could be printed more cheaply, as no binding).

    1. Re:Epic Fail... by thesupraman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sigh, does your two year old use books ONLY for reading?

      as I pointing out, reading does come on the list, its just not always at the top, and children
      certainly dont treat delicate electronic devices with respect that their cost and complexity
      would warrant.

      Or do you disagree with that?

      It is quite obvious that Ms.Potters approach to making a book was exactly the opposite of an e-book....

    2. Re:Epic Fail... by Abraxas26 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Respect for books(and electronics) is something that must be taught. Since young children are fantastic at mimicry the best way to teach them is by example. Read with them, flip the pages, encourage them to treat the book gently. If they want to throw something give them a ball. If they want to hit something give them a pot and a wooden spoon. If the child insists on treating the book badly then take it away and don't give it back until they finish crying. If you teach respect for books then your electronics are (mostly) safe as well.

      Can someone lend me a kindle (/ipad/whatever) and a stopwatch? I have an experiment in mind...

      It is the job of a parent to inhibit destructive behavior in their children. If an iPad or Kindle is introduced to them properly then there is little risk. Children have no concept of money but they do recognize value. If the device is seen as valuable to the child then it is not as likely to be destroyed.

      See if you can corroborate this experiment:
      If you give a young child a bucket of quarters and put them near a fountain I guarantee every single quarter will be thrown or dumped into the fountain. Give them something they like(candy, favorite toy) and it is extremely unlikely(not zero) they will throw this object away no matter how little its monetary value.