If e-books are better than printed out books because of their lasting status, do you think all books in any library should be converted into this form? Otherwise, should we let out children develop scoliosis caused by carrying too heavy books to and fro school?

John

dense _content_ makes things difficult for the reader. :+)

i’m all in favor of shorter sentences and paragraphs.

especially since, in the world of electronic publications –
physical space isn’t an expensive commodity, like it is
in the world of printed matter. so yes, space things out!
use large margins! give the reader some breathing room!

but that is a manipulation of typographical-type variables.
in terms of the _writing_ itself, let the content dictate it.

***

roger said:
> I’m saying that I used to work on a newspaper
> and on different magazines as an editor and
> I’ve written for newspapers and magazines
> as a freelancer. The “nature of the content”
> does not account for all differences.
> The medium does impact the style.

you’re talking about two different things here.
both of them are valid. and both are irrelevant. :+)

first, you are talking from the standpoint of
a professional writer for print. those creatures
_do_ indeed alter their writing as required.
“assignments” are provided — “give me
1200 words on how d.r.m. is hassling users,
with a humorous slant” — and they proceed.

the other perspective from which you speak
pertains to the _vehicle_of_delivery_. i grant
that writing for a newspaper is different from
writing for a magazine is different from a book.
people bring different _expectations_ to the
_experience_ of reading different _vehicles_,
and the writer must bend to those expectations.

the two perspectives have intersecting demands;
the assignment is often a function of the vehicle.
desired word-count will depend on space available,
and the very nature of the topics is usually affected.

but look closely at the mode of electronic publications,
and you’ll see both of these perspectives lose strength.

first, i believe the content of tomorrow will increasingly be
_self-motivated_, rather than written _on_assignment_.
the wonder of the web is that it allows individual people
to give voice to their hearts and brains and imaginations.

the content in newspapers and magazines, especially,
has an unstated, but pervasive, raison d’etre — which is
to draw attention to the ads, and thereby move product.

tomorrow’s writers don’t have to serve that ulterior motive.
they can write _whatever_they_want_, and put it online.
they can reach an audience without “selling out to ads”.

this kind of self-expression does not — and _should_not_ –
let its form be dictated by word-count or delivery-vehicle.
it would compromise itself, badly and unnecessarily, if it did.
the message is the important thing here, not the medium.

and it is precisely because of its specialness as _message_
that this content — even though written by amateurs — will
eclipse that of professional writers doing “assigned” pieces.
people don’t want “slick” anymore. we are sick of slick.
we want “real”, “honest”, and “heartfelt”. sure we want it
_well-written_. but plenty of “amateurs” can write well,
especially when they channel it directly from their heart.

as for the second perspective, the demands of the vehicle,
if we examine cyberspace, distinctions between “newspaper”
and “magazine” and “book” bleed away into a nothingness.

specifically, it’s all being read _on-screen_, and word-count
has no physical meaning in a universe of unlimited space.
indeed, you come to learn that _the_reader’s_attention_
has now become the chief constraining/channeling vehicle.

the reader will not be bringing a “newspaper mindset” to
your piece, or a “magazine” one, or a “book” one, so you
don’t have to write with the expectation of such a mindset.

indeed, if you _want_ the reader to _have_ such a mindset,
you’re going to have to _create_ it, inside of your content…

what all of this means is that tomorrow’s writers have been
largely freed from the “vehicular constraints” of the past,
and can instead concentrate on the flow of their content.

and now you are telling them they should alter that flow,
to wear leashes created by yesterday’s dead-tree mentality?
wrong. way wrong. dead wrong. wrong wrong wrong.

is a blog more like a newspaper, or a magazine, or a book?
the truth of the matter is that it doesn’t matter, and the
blog-writer therefore does not (and should not) care…

if the piece you are writing _should_ be written like a book,
because that’s the approach that will do its content justice,
then write it like a book. if it should be written as if it were
being printed in a magazine, because that’s what the content
itself calls for, then write it that way. and if your content is
best presented as a newspaper article, then write it that way.

-bowerbird

The medium does affect how the content should be presented, i think and that was and remains my point. I thought Bowerbird has some excellent solutions for content.

For the visually impaired, it’s not just a question of making the type larger – as Bower noted, it might work better as a double-page spread instead of the recto/verso we have now – the single page which is all i’ve seen anyway; perhaps there are readers out there with this double spread, and if so, send one along because i’d love to review it.

I might do a piece on Solutions to the EBook Readability Issue, which could be an interesting piece and spark lively discussion. I think many of you here have contributed to that and i’ll give credit where credit is due, of course.

You and i have a similar background so we can see eye-to-eye, though a similar background is not necessary for that really…

i have some VERY large books as you do: one by Taschen of Shadow Box Art and Curiousity Cabinets (which i too make, hence i have the book) an the bok has to be about 25 tall by 13″ across. An off size and huge. The illustrations of course work very well and the text is clever ~~ It DOES run across the page which one would think would be too long, but the leading is wide, so there is much space between the lines that lets some air in and thus makes for a much better presentation.

You and i, i think, agree. Our mutual experience has taught us the same thing, it would seem.

Be well & thanks ~ hope you’ll keep reading/listening in and commenting.

sadi

My concern is that they will just give up; throw their hands up.

I like your idea of a double screen that opens like an actual book instead of a one page 8.5 by 11 type of thing. That would work much better i think and i’m surprised i haven’t seen this yet… is anybody doing this and if not, then you’ve really stumbled onto something here or thought of something truly innovative that you should make haste and get to some of the e-book people. I think it’s a super-idea.

Perhaps my next column will be What Can We Do to Make EBooks More Readable On Screen and surely that would be attributed to you (if you wish to reveal your name or we can do it anonymously) but it’s a terrific idea.

Perhaps someone is doing it though i’ve yet to see it.

I’ve recently started reading on my Tungsten E with Mobireader and it’s working terifically well… David helped me get it back up and running and now i can download books til my heart’s content. A wonderful evolution for me.

Thanks all for weighing in… Sorry i didn’t get to comments until later in the day. It’s been one of those but i will get to more, i promise.

Sorry to interupt the thread here… do keep it going if you wish.

Cheers all,

Sadi

Yes, i’d certainly try out your speech program and anything else you have to evaluate for you if you like. I would need a token, that much is true. You can email me at srp@teleread.org and i’ll get the email … be in touch and be well. It sounds like you are doing interesting work; where are you based out of?

s.r.p.