Will Kindle Kill the Book Star?

April 16, 2009
Taipei, Taiwan

While I was in NYC last month I saw quiet a few people with a Kindle reading device on the subway. As I constantly struggle with the weight of my bag and all the stuff, necessary or not, that is in it, a Kindle seems like just the right thing. It would be light, compact and it would ensure that I would always have a book on me, as the book is always the first to go when I try to make my bag a bit lighter.

Yet, I just can't seem to quiet get with it. I LOVE books! I love the weight, the smell, the sound of pages turning, the different sizes and the feeling of holding one in your hand in anticipation of discovering all the wonderful knowledge it contains. I love writing in my books and making notes or underlining passages that resonates with me or that I have an argument with. I love how the pages yellow and it grows old with you. I love the cracked spine and when you re-read that book, there is a secret history that unravels that you and the book have created together. I love the memory the physical presence the book can evoke."Oh, yes, we bought this at that used book store on the corner next to the Hungarian bakery, then that night, as I was in the tube reading, you came in and..." which is why the book looks like its been soaked and re-dried.

All of these ideas and feelings that the physicality the book invokes cannot be replaced by a digital reading device, irrespective of how convenient and sensible it maybe. Yet the invention of the Kindle is just another step in our cultural evolution.
Gutenberg and the printing press has reigned supreme and changed the course of human cultural evolution like none-other. Will Kindle give Gutenberg a run for its money as it effects publishing and writing and acts as another brick in the wall of our changing notion of possession and ownership?

On the other hand, a new digital reading device being developed by a company called Plastic Logic that is the size of 8x10 which is meant to be a digital reading device specifically for magazines and news papers is something that I can get behind. We some how do not have the same feelings of attachment towards periodicals or newspapers. We read them and we toss them. There is no love lost when you throw out yesterday's New York Times. What is it about a book, a physical book, a collection of ink, paper and glue that can quicken and pulse and make you giddy like a school girl? Its pure magic somehow. Maybe our DNA has been embedded with centuries and centuries of relationship, knowledge and intimacy with the printed word that makes me have such unease with Kindle.

Call me a romantic, but I would much rather live in a room stacked floor to ceiling with books than a immaculate white space where at the push of a button I can read the book of my choice.

Trinity College Library, Image Courtesy of http://skippyshamrock.tripod.com/longroom.jpg

===
April 27, 2009

I just read this article on the NYTimes about Kindle and various reactions and opinions about it, is an interesting companion to this blog.

A Generation of Thieves

Nov 14, 2008
Los Angeles, Ca

I had a discussion with a friend of mine via IM yesterday about Intellectual Property and its applicable laws protecting it. Then last night, as I was slugging my way through The New Yorker, I noted a book that is mentioned in the "Briefly Noted" section of the magazine.

The book is called "Remix" by Lawrence Lessig,
"As Lessig, a law professor at Stanford, sees it, if intellectual-property law is left as it is an entire generation will be criminalized. He argues that the ways in which young people break copyright laws help them to become the sort of people we want them to be—creative and collaborative. Kids today are simply not going to give up downloading music and using copyrighted material in YouTube videos: they belong to a culture for which “remix” is “the essential art.” Lessig’s proposals for revising copyright are compelling, because they rethink intellectual-property rights without abandoning them. He argues that hybrids that combine the “commercial and sharing” economies can create value for both sides (as Harry Potter fan sites and Lostpedia have done); indeed, one problem is media companies’ appropriating the work of fans without returning the favor. “When both benefit,” Lessig writes, “how do we say who is riding for free?”

I believe that as artists and creators we should be able to benefit from the "art" that which we create. After all, this choice of a life is a gamble, there is no guarantee that you will ever be successful, or even be able to pay your rent in the life time in which you spent creating the "art." But I think certain amount of content should be available for "free" for other users to amend, absorb and repatriate into something new, even if the new "art" is unlike the original at all. Which brings to mind the Creative Commons model and or how NIN offers tracks of their songs for download without charge online and you can remix and re post to be shared by other fans.

As I wonder about this model of "collective creating" and how I could incorporate it into my life as an artist - slightly difficult since my primary medium is rather "fixed" - I came up with an idea. What if a collaborative process was offered, I could either provide digital files of a selection of images, or actual prints, and a small group of artists (working in both photography and other mediums) utilized the "base" in which I have provided and do what they will to it. Then we will have collectively created something new.

But here is where the sticking point in Intellectual Property Law begins - who would own that piece of new art that is created? Or do all participating artists goes into this with the agreement that we are all owners of the new art?

Does the idea of "ownership" only truly matters when there is a perceived value for the "object"?

Art does have value. Radiohead proved that the fan will pay for the music by independently releasing their last album with the "pay what you will" system. NIN gave away its latest album for free online - Trent Reznor said "This one is on me!" I paid for the Radiohead album because I wanted to be heard that art has value. I happily accepted Trent's download and respected him all the more for acknowledging the fans who have supported him for nearly 20 years.

Is it the corporation in between who will rake in the largest profits from our angst and demented dreams that we have a problem with then?

I don't have the answers to any of these questions. But I am excited about the idea of "collectively creating," think I will buy Lessig's book and see his opinion on IP laws, and believe that the more we give the more we will be given in return.

The Nesting Instinct

August 18, 2008
Los Angeles, CA

We made a pilgrimage to IKEA yesterday to pick up a few new furniture pieces for the new house as moving day will be upon us soon. Don can't help be give me a hard time about giving away my IKEA furniture pieces that I had bought 12 years ago to charity (because its wobbly) and buying newer ones.

IKEA at any day of the week is always a bit of a clauster-f* but especailly on the weekends. After we had paid for most of our stuff and I was waiting past the check out as Don needed to go back and get the right size rug for his office. I couldn't help but wonder about all of these people who are at IKEA today, shopping for that bit of something that will make their lives that much more perfect, complete, a notch closer to the stylized life that we are supposed to live according to catalogs and magazines. I certainly am not above the criticism, after all, I am shopping at IKEA for our new home. But aside from the effort towards - whatever - there is a nesting instinct that is deeply rooted in us, the desire to make our home more secure, more comfortable, more HOME.

As we paid for these less than expensive furniture pieces, I couldn't help but want for these new tables and desks to last forever. I wondered how we have traded quality for something that is disposable and literally stamped out of a factory. Maybe its the same reason why we eat at McDonalds - its easier and the cheaper price fills that nesting instinct instantly, instead of having to wait until you have the money for that one superior hand crafted table.

By the time I made it to the loading dock where you can load your new home onto the back to your car - I was put off by all the people jostling for position and have no regards for one another. I recalled that scene from "Fight Club" where Ed Norton's character talks about he items in his apartment and how he kinda thought that he had it all. At that moment, I kinda wished all of it would go up in one giant flame of explosion (much like the scene that follows in "Fight Club"), the entire IKEA store and all the other stores around Burbank, selling you things that will come to own you one day instead.

Is there a way to fulfill our nesting instincts and not be trapped in the nest that we made, not be owned by it?