I particularly love old books, found in second hand book stores, that have bolognese sauce and pen ink stains on random pages. Or books from the library where if you’re lucky, you sometimes find the previous borrower’s shopping list in the middle.

There’s something so romantic about printed books – and those of us horders (or as I prefer, “collectors”) will always want to fill our homes with (read show off) the beautiful and special books that have coloured our lives.

First of all, there’s a definite economic component to this print v. digital debate – much as we want to believe otherwise, not everyone in this country can afford to drop $200+ on an e-reader. As long as there is economic disparity in this country, we will continue to have print books.

For seconds, reading a print book is a tactile, emotional, psychological experience that we ignore at our peril. Parents and children bond over print books. People cozy up with novels in treehouses and bookstores and coffee shops and bathtubs. I’m not sure why we, as a culture, are hell-bent on purging every single tactile, slow, sedate pleasure from our lifestyles, but I’m personally not having it. And I am not alone. In fact, I believe the slow food, voluntary simplicity, and “take back your time” folk would agree with me.

Finally, in terms of services to the blind and otherwise visually impaired, which, admittedly, includes this commenter, e-readers have a long, LONG way to go. The iPad is a step in the right direction, but we’re not there yet. Large print books and books on CD/cassette, as well as print materials in Braille, are still the best solutions for persons with visual disabilities.

Thus speaketh one librarian. Please, everybody, go read Jaron Lanier’s “You Are Not a Gadget” for further explanations of why all this digital kerfulffle will NOT save humanity.

Stepping down from my soapbox,

L.

Personally, I’ll buy paper until I can buy my “e-books” from multiple sources. Also want the technology to improve … even from the Apple submission.