As you may have read here more than you really want, I have and use a Kindle, the Amazon electronic book that holds about 1500 books but weighs less than 10 oz. It is a good device for reading and it can accept book files through the atmosphere without being hooked to anything else. It does so using a cellphone-like network called Whispernet. Getting a book into the device is so magical and quick that it is tempting to download a book just for the fun of getting it and seeing it appear in the device. I have done just that several times, changing my level of interest in the book to accommodate the fun of seeing the file appear.
I have had a Kindle since April of 2008 and since then, I have downloaded 254 items for it, plus a few blog posts and a few issues of The Atlantic Monthly. That works out to a book every 2.8 days. At the standard price of $9.99 a book, that works about to $2537.46. That is only an estimate since several of the items were free or lower cost than the standard price. A few were more.
My question is "Is that an immoral amount? A wasteful amount?" I think many people would simply use the basic figure of a book every three days and conclude flatly and immediately that it is immoral, wasteful and nutty. Some might go a step further and ask how many I have read, thinking that if I can read that many, ok. That approach uses the standard of reading as the justification for purchase. To me, that is indeed the basic standard. But I suspect my reading is a bit more complicated, that there are conditions and qualifications. For at least a year, I have been struggling to get a good perspective on my reading and my reading purchases.
The whole Kindle bit started after we got rid of 700 of our 1000 books to try to emerge from the book swamp of our office. Sitting among stacks of books that hadn't or couldn't be fitted onto the shelves, we said a big bunch had to go. A big bunch went. Not that we hadn't culled before - we had, several times. Lynn is a librarian and a professor of library science. She knows about weeding the collection. When she first reviewed the local high school library about 1986, she found almanacs from the 50's and books on the job situation from the 60's. Some books had not been checked out even once in 40 years.
That 700 item weeding was the most drastic we have ever done. I am not sure if we will ever have to do such culling again. We might.
A teaching partner of mine was shocked when I recommended a book to her and later stated that I hadn't read it. In college, I was told by my English professor that I should consider majoring in literature because I added so much to discussions of our books, such as "Wings of the Dove" by Henry James. I had never read the book and still haven't. I advocate attending a meeting on a book even if you haven't read it. Not that I am against reading, quite the opposite. I just have experienced that "reading" a book is quite a variable event. It varies from day to day and definitely from reader to reader.
I enjoy discussing what exactly "reading" a book is. Here is the author of the book, the woman who wrote it and revised it and created it. Ok, Lady, I am reading from page 113. The page begins "Simple deciding..." So, author and knower, what are the next words? She can't say. Is she a fraud? Not the author? What does she actually know? What does it actually matter?
I read the opening words of this Omnivoracious blog entry the other day and had one of those Aha! moments. The author complained about such a professional loading of required reading, he had little time for exploring or sampling new and other items. Yes, serendipity! I still get a big lift from walking into a Border's or Barnes and Noble bookstore and discovering things I am curious about, things I like to know exist, books I may or not read, and I admit, books I may or may not buy.
(Copyedited by Dr. L.S. Kirby, whose sharp eye and skills are deeply appreciated)
