I don't make a habit of quoting myself, but since this is a return to an earlier topic, let me make an exception.
I said, on this very blog, back on February 27 of this year, that
"there is no reason not to wish Amazon well [with its release of the Kindle 2), but for now what they are doing and what libraries like ours are doing are complementary, not in competition."
Ten months have passed, during which I have made pretty frequent use of the library's Kindle 2. How does that earlier claim stand up now?
A few observations, unscientific and anecdotal:
- I'm increasingly comfortable reading off a Kindle screen. In other words, it feels less and less like a "transition" from printed page to digital display.
- I'm curious to know if I actually find reading easier from a Kindle than from a printed book.
- I find at least some of the features of reading from a Kindle (e.g. the capacity to create notes on the Kindle as I read) intriguing.
- When traveling, I value the small size and weight of the Kindle.
There is nothing particularly surprising or earth-shattering in this. It's just my notes to myself as I make yet another adjustment to a new medium, the sort of shift that is required of all of us, with increasing frequency.
The main issue, at least for me, is resisting the either/or mentality.
I'm a librarian, and it could be argued that I therefore have a bigger state than most people in how the relationship between print/digital plays out.
But from my experience so far, I am less concerned all the time about what the medium is, and more interested in what medium/media foster more and better reading.
Isn't that what matters most?