Slashdot Mirror
Neil Gaiman On Why Libraries Are the Gates to the Future
Neil Gaiman spoke Monday for the Reading Agency's annual lecture series. His talk centered on the importance of libraries and of reading for pleasure. His talk was transcribed and posted by The Guardian. Quoting:
"Fiction has two uses. Firstly, it's a gateway drug to reading. The drive to know what happens next, to want to turn the page, the need to keep going, even if it's hard, because someone's in trouble and you have to know how it's all going to end that's a very real drive. And it forces you to learn new words, to think new thoughts, to keep going. To discover that reading per se is pleasurable. Once you learn that, you're on the road to reading everything. And reading is key. ... The simplest way to make sure that we raise literate children is to teach them to read, and to show them that reading is a pleasurable activity. And that means, at its simplest, finding books that they enjoy, giving them access to those books, and letting them read them. I don't think there is such a thing as a bad book for children. Every now and again it becomes fashionable among some adults to point at a subset of children's books, a genre, perhaps, or an author, and to declare them bad books, books that children should be stopped from reading. ... It's tosh. It's snobbery and it's foolishness. There are no bad authors for children, that children like and want to read and seek out, because every child is different. They can find the stories they need to, and they bring themselves to stories. A hackneyed, worn-out idea isn't hackneyed and worn out to them. This is the first time the child has encountered it. Do not discourage children from reading because you feel they are reading the wrong thing. Fiction you do not like is a route to other books you may prefer. And not everyone has the same taste as you."
Traditional libraries are not the future. The dead tree archives will here after be a curiosity.
That said, repositories of books and stories etc will remain very important. They will however be increasingly a digital experience.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I Lrn 2 Read good thru technology
Without free Internet access, libraries today would be nothing more than useless repositories of books that no one wants to read. Libraries don't even have a monopoly on free Internet access, either: many coffee shops also offer free Wi-Fi.
Nah. All libraries are full of books I don't want to read. Yet, they seem to contain hundreds of books I do want to read. And I buy too many books. Perhaps some day more ebooks, but I feel like the ebooks should be cheaper than their dead tree equivalents.
As a sidenote: Not too many coffee shops offer free Wi-Fi and equipment to non-customers.
It is what it is.
You go to a library to look for books. .... Oooh shiny thing
You go onto the internet to look for
A dead tree book beats a text on a monitor, and even e-ink readers. A book you can take with you and doesn't need power (although you do need a light source).
An e-reader is great (use it myself a lot), but for quickly flipping back to a certain bit to check/read it again, a paper book wins hands down.
I found more interesting books/authors by browsing the books on the bookshelves in a library than online.
Ah yes, I remember when I used to spend whole days at libraries, way back in the 20th century, before the World Wide Web existed.
Seriously, we have these things called computers, and books are on them now, including works of fiction for your reading pleasure.
Without free Internet access, libraries today would be nothing more than useless repositories of books that no one wants to read. Libraries don't even have a monopoly on free Internet access, either: many coffee shops also offer free Wi-Fi.
I've got to admit that I don't hit the library as often as I used to since I got an e-reader. But occasionally I want a book that's not a century old (Gutenberg) and I don't want to buy it. So I wander into the library and pick up something from the Dead Tree collection (DON'T speak to me about Overdrive!)
But libraries aren't just books and never were. I checked out a lot of records when I was in high school. More recently, I've checked out DVDs of movies. RedBox and Netflix can offer similar services, but I still scan the library shelves. Never know what may catch my eye.
Thanks for this, finally I don't feel guilty anymore for downloading 150.000 eBooks.
You go onto the internet to look for .... Oooh shiny thing
I just logged on to check the weather. That was twelve years ago...
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
Is this garden-variety schizophrenia or some other syndrome?
He is just an assficionado.
Maybe his whole speech was, but the quoted section was in defence of fiction, not libraries.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Computers are in essence information copying machines. This means you'll end up having to pay for anything written after 1922 because of a law called copyright. Dead tree libraries use a loophole that avoids problems with copyright by allowing patrons to read a single book one after the other without requiring the making of new copies made.
Be all Wickersham Brothers about it, why don't you. The guy's a decent writer.
My well-funded local library stocks all the CDs and DVDs one would ever want to watch, but even the library is trying to get everyone to transition to digital by offering free access to Spotify- and Netflix-like services to those holding a library card.
He praises the lack of "snobbery" about books, and then goes on to declare books to be superior to e-books.
I love books, I have 1400 or so, and I only buy e-books that I don't really care much about (like Microsoft books that will be out of date in 1 year). But that is my preference. I can't make an objective case that books are superior to e-books, and neither can Gaiman.
The internet didn't kill the library. Library patronage was declining long before the internet. Libraries, sprang into existence because books were expensive and most people struggled to provide shelter and food for their families. Post WWII, at least in the US, things began to change and people had more disposable income. As people climbed the economic ladder, they were in a better position to purchase their own books, particularly paperbacks, trading money for convenience (as is the case with most consumer goods). This trend continued through the 1960s and 70s and really accelerated in the 1980s and 1990s as book clubs took off all over the place. It was fashionable to be reading the latest best seller and the serial model of the library couldn't support that.
All the internet did was change the purchase mode from paper to electronic versions of the media. It didn't impact the use of the library because that change had already manifested itself based on the economic wherewithal of the patrons. Interestingly enough, both the Philadelphia and New York public libraries reported significant increases in usage during the last two recessions. It would seem that even with the plethora of electronic devices to read e-books, when money is tight and one has to watch expenses, one gives up the convenience and goes back to the library.
In short, it's not technology that is causing the demise of the library, but increased disposable income.
No, he's just nuts. That'll be $250 please.
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
Trollitis.
Historically, the list books you check out from a library have been protected. However, with the way the government is thinking about it, it is just metadata, since it isn't the books themselves. At this point, I'd honestly be surprised if they weren't mining that data also.
Remember:
Power Corrupts
Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely
Knowledge is Power
Therefore
Absolute Knowledge Corrupts Absolutely
tl;dr
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
And I buy too many books. Perhaps some day more ebooks, but I feel like the ebooks should be cheaper than their dead tree equivalents.
Why? Why should ebooks be cheaper than dead trees? Are they less convienient? Do they wear out faster?
Watch this Heartland Institute video
That's funny, because I've often wished that dead tree books were keyword searchable.
Think about the origin of the word "index".
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Why? Why should ebooks be cheaper than dead trees? Are they less convienient? Do they wear out faster?
Some obvious points
And yes, they do have positive points also.
It is what it is.
Exactly, why would anybody go to library when any book can be downloaded from torrents and read on device with e-inc screen? And if it's immoral to download 'pirated' book - what is the difference between downloading a book and taking it from library?
You go onto the internet to look for .... Oooh shiny thing
I just logged on to check the weather. That was twelve years ago...
This is not the right place to check the weather.
If you want to have kids who are readers, then you first must set an example. If kids see their parents reading books for pleasure, they will be much more inclined to become readers. Read to your kids every day, until they start to learn to read, then have them read to you every day. I was fortunate enough to grow up in a house where both my parents enjoyed reading, and a trip to the town library for new books was a weekly family event.
Few libraries could hope to compare to Project Gutenberg. Although books must be free of copyright to be on the site that is not such a disadvantage. Somewhere at around 1920 the use of the English language became rather crude whereas before radio and television were highly present the use of language was quite superior. Often the books of the earlier period were vastly superior to the expensive books now in book stores. But for those that insist we do need an electronic lending library that releases current materials. If we include a 14 day auto delete function as well as a good anti-copy scheme an electronic library could be as fair to publishers as the ink and paper routine.
Most people who read a lot still like paper and ink which means there is something lacking in electronic screens or electronics.
If anyone wants a block buster product idea how about an electronic score sheet for musicians such that a foot pedal could do the page changes as on plays. Imagine if we could store our sheet music in a screen like device and select the tune to play and turn the page with a foot pedal. And for another item how about a device that can listen to a tune and then write the melody as sheet music in the requested key and clef? Imagine using an FM radio that can be transcribed for any instrument at the push of a button. Want to be a billionaire?
I'm fine with the idea that there is no bad fiction that somebody likes. However, it was a bit of a shock to pick my son up from daycare and see he's happily reading Captain Underpants and the Perilous Plot of Professor Poopypants. That was actually the first fiction I saw him read for fun.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Ah yes, I remember when I used to spend whole days at libraries, way back in the 20th century, before the World Wide Web existed.
And they'll still be there in the 22nd century.
Seriously, we have these things called computers, and books are on them now, including works of fiction for your reading pleasure.
And for almost anything written in my six decade lifetime you'll either have to pay to read them or pirate the content. Yeah, I'm reading "A Tale of Two Cities" on mt phone, but if you want to read "All the Lives He Led" (boring book, quit halfway through) you're either going to have to pay, go to TPB (if you can find it there) or visit your public library, which is how I know Pohl's last book wasn't worth paying to read. You can download it for free in 73 years.
Without free Internet access, libraries today would be nothing more than useless repositories of books that no one wants to read.
Well, it is true that 97% of the population doesn't want to read at all, but unlike you I'm not part of the aliterate 97%. To misquote Twain, an aliterate has no advantage over an illiterate.
Free Martian Whores!
That's funny, because I've often wished that dead tree books were keyword searchable.
Nonfiction books have this thing in the back called an "index" that lists the words in the book and what pages they're on. For fiction, word search is useless. If you want to find where you were last time you were reading there's this thing you slip between the pages called a "bookmark".
For browsing for ebooks you haven't found yet, there are ebook index sites and web search engines.
How is a search engine going to find a book you've never heard of by an author whose name you don't know? If you find something on an index site, how do you know it's worth paying for?
I swear, you kids today...
Free Martian Whores!
If you don't read great literature, you'll end up being like the people you see on TV. Reading expands your possibilities.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
While I mostly agree, the lending part mostly doesn't apply to libraries, because the users aren't anonymous and already have to have an account with the library to borrow in the first place. So the DRM-laden lending works fine in that situation.
The bigger problem for DRM is that users mostly check out ebooks in formats that they can read in their favorite reader; and that mostly means without DRM. So the library looks at what people check out, and spends more money on PDF-based ebook lending programs.
You sir are Evil.
Appendix too. All exist to greater or lesser extent in dead-tree books
For non-fiction, that is generally true. But even if non-fiction that isn't a technical manual or textbook, the indexing is usually really, really weak.
With electronic search, how easily you get to the information you want is related directly to your ability to search, and to include context in your search. Also, having electronic search available doesn't delete the index; it is for all those times when the index doesn't have what you want, or sucks.
I have to say, I do get a little fed up with pedestal upon which we place books. Don't get me wrong: it's a worthwhile pastime, but people develop such elitists attitudes towards reading. People judge others, and judge themselves, by the quality and quantity of their reading material. They lament how people are reading less, and how this will destroy intelligence in the average person. If you don't read, or worse, don't enjoy reading, then it means that there's something wrong. Your imagination is underdeveloped or malformed; a product of all the worst bits of society.
The fact is, while reading is indeed an intellectual activity, it's an intellectual activity that appeals to people to varying degrees. Some people simply do not find intellectual nourishment from books. Now, perhaps it's because they are stunted in their intellect or imagination, but often, there are other ways they stimulate their brain. Indeed, social situations can be very mentally stimulating, requiring complex thought processes to navigate successfully. I myself have found that mathematics holds far greater mental stimulation than reading (and I used to read all the time). Juggling apparently is a very good way to improve your brain, and caters for the more kinaesthetic learners.
I'm glad you enjoy books Neil, but please don't make the mistake of thinking they're for everyone.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
If you're reading stuff you brought with you, you can just go to a coffee shop.
If you're not buying the coffee, you can just read in the regular part of the library anyways.
Many places have a coffee shop in the library; we do here. It is nice.
If history books are your big thing, you often are already reading fiction.
I was cloned, the AlphaWolf_HK you replied to is 1/8th my size and gnaws on his kitty.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
He used a capital "I" in the username instead of a lower-case "l", which look the same in a non-serif font. Slashdot doesn't actually allow duplicate usernames, even though there are unique user IDs (after all, the user page needs a unique URL and those use the username rather than ID, e.g. slashdot.org/~Prune/comments ).
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
Mod parent up.
"Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
Thanks for your graceful remark, now I'll surely take your advice, being called a fucktard by an anonymous COWARD.
I used the phrase dead tree book, to distinguish between an e-book and/or text on a (lcd) monitor.
Of course I could have simply said 'paper book', but hey, I need to go with the times...
They need to rename that one site "Wikitraps".
"Frederick Douglass taught that literacy is the path from slavery to freedom.
There are many kinds of slavery and many kinds of freedom, but reading is still the path."
-Carl Sagan
I've kept every book anyone ever gave to my kids (three of them, age 7, 9 and 12). Their library has over 300 books on it now, everything from the Bob Books and Dr. Seuss to Harry Potter and the Golden Compass. My kids love to read, and we read to them every night.
There's a quote-- "a writer is a reader moved to emulation." I don't know who said it. But one day a few years ago, the two oldest kids asked me if they could write their own book. I said "of course!", so we did. http://www.amazon.com/My-Sister-Makes-Me-Laugh/dp/0977649725 Now they're published authors and famous in their schools.
But, here's the funny part. The book was immediately banned by the school system. Unfortunately, it has the word "pee pee" in it, and a little bit of rule breaking and trouble making. But more importantly, if a book doesn't come from a select set of only three publishers who are known to only print "safe" books, it has to go through a strict review (at the district level) before it can be approved for a school library. I don't know if it's like that everywhere, but that's how it is here in Texas.
So, public libraries are suspicious to me now. Quiet censorship shaping young minds.
To fight this, my kids take a whole box full of their book into each new grade they go into and give them away to their classmates. The "pee pee" word hasn't produced any anarchists yet, but the experiment is still young...