In a previous post, I extolled the virtues of Amazon's Kindle and how it will affect the way people read, both positively and negatively. As a technophile, I generally find myself on the side of technology, and in the case of books and the book industry, I definitely do think that eBooks and the like are the way of the future if the book is expected to survive. Like other forms of media -- music, movies, video games -- the printed word has to change or die. Just look at the newspaper and magazine industries. For better or for worse, paper has to become digital.
Now, I'm not necessarily saying there has to be a wholesale change in the way books are distributed and consumed. Like all things, the transition should be slow and natural, and I don't truly believe that the physical format will ever die out; there will always be a market for physical books. Having spent the better part of my adolescence devouring books from the library, I have countless memories of reading anything under the sun, new and old, large and small, holding books smelling of paper and age, all of which make up my childhood. And frankly, I wouldn't have it any other way. Given the choice and the means, I'd buy books in paper form while trying out the Kindle. But those are my experiences and choices, shaped by my childhood. Who says that children are experiencing literature in the same way today; who are we to say: these are our memories and experiences, you must acquire them, cherish them, and love them too?
Also interesting are writer Sherman Alexie's comments a few weeks ago at New York's BookExpo in relation to the Kindle, specifically calling it elitist. He's right. Technology, especially high technology, is not readily accessible to the poor. My feelings on this matter are mixed; I definitely do agree with Sherman Alexie's charge of technological elitism. But to speak to that, let's face it, literature as us MFAers know it is consumed primarily by the well off, the academic elite, the upper and middle class. Outside of the handful of writers -- the Dan Browns, the Stephen Kings of the world -- books are already restricted by a form of social elitism.
On the other hand, it's important to know that no one reads the way they used to, ten, twenty, thirty years ago. Attention is being siphoned by other media such as video games, movie, and television. If books wish to remain competitive as a form of entertainment, and even more importantly, if it wishes to widen its audience so that it isn't just a medium and art form for the elite, it must change. Whether this is in the form of Kindle books or PDF files easily accessed online by all, I don't know. At any rate, Sherman Alexie is interviewed in the following link, and clarifies his stance of the "elitist Kindle." It's a great read, and encapsulates a lot of important points and ideas on the complex subject. Find it here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Hi Eric,
I found my way here via the P&W Speakeasy... I'm an incoming MFA'er as well. (UOregon)
I have to disagree with your statement: "But to speak to that, let's face it, literature as us MFAers know it is consumed primarily by the well off, the academic elite, the upper and middle class"
Literature via print media is currently available to people of all classes; chiefly through the vehicle you mentioned raiding as a child: the library. I spent a lot of time there, too, reading literature, and I grew up very poor. Whether literature is "consumed" mostly by the well off or not, I'm not sure, but I agree with Alexie's point that it's important literature remain available for people of all classes.
An interesting subject, though, so thanks for posting about it! And for the record, I harbor no ill will toward the Kindle. :)
Monica
Hi Monica,
First, thanks for the comment, and congrats to your upcoming U of Oregon MFA program. It's a really great program.
I see what you mean by literature being available to all -- and I certainly do agree with your point about access and libraries. I, too, practically grew up in the library, and for a while, some of my best friends in middle school were the librarians. Sad, I know.
In terms of consumption and class, my original thought process was in regards to who MFAers are writing for today, and who are reading what MFAers are writing?
My immediate thoughts about this was primarily, when do people pick up their taste for literature, when are they indoctrinated? I tend to think for the majority, it's during college, where English majors are reading, analyzing, and writing about writing, not high school. Perhaps my high school experience was different, but I cannot recall enjoying reading any of the books in my high school English classes at that age -- The Scarlet Letter? Who at 15 can enjoy the Scarlet Letter? In my opinion it's in high school where literature loses so many readers, and in college where the art of writing and reading is created, maybe manufactured.
I'm kind of rambling and I have to admit this is an issue of art and access, something that I've grappled with over the years, and certainly not restricted to just writing. And it's something much more complex than the few sentences I devoted to it in my original post. But I do think that there is a specific audience for MFA/high art writing and a specific group of MFAers who are writing for said audience, of which the literature is not accessible or enjoyable by the majority of people out there. I guess that was my original point. :)
Post a Comment