What is the future of print technology?

[goldhawk]

Newbie (and some "oldie") SF writers make the mistake of taking any trend to simplistic extremes. The history of science and technology shows the opposite - the future will be more complicated than the past. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot, unable or unwilling to look at the big picture and to benefit from history.

From Colonies in Space:

The shuttle has its roots in the dreams of the rocket pioneers of the 1930s. They foresaw the development of spaceships which would lift off from Earth, perform a mission in space, and return intact to Earth to be used for further missions. They scarcely imagined the actual situation of three or four decades later, when a rocket costing perhaps $100 million would lift off, perform a mission, and be destroyed either by falling into the ocean or by burning up reentering the atmosphere. Arthur Clarke said of those days, "We were not that imaginative."

Regardless of what you may think up, the future will be even weirder.

 

[Laer Carroll]

Here's the series, in order, for those of you who are interested:

• http://kriswrites.com/2010/10/21/the-business-rusch-changing-times-overview/
• http://kriswrites.com/2010/10/28/the-business-rusch-understanding-publishing-changing-times-part-2/
• http://kriswrites.com/2010/11/04/th...for-big-publishing-changing-times-part-three/
• http://kriswrites.com/2010/11/10/th...save-big-publishing-changing-times-part-four/
• http://kriswrites.com/2010/11/17/the-business-rusch-the-nimble-presses-changing-times-continued/
• http://kriswrites.com/2010/11/25/the-business-rusch-bookstores-changing-times-part-six/

Thanks! After reading the first (overview) post, I liked it so much I sent her $20 via the PayPal button.

 

[goldhawk]

Thanks! After reading the first (overview) post, I liked it so much I sent her $20 via the PayPal button.

She has also posted part seven: http://kriswrites.com/2010/12/01/the-business-rusch-writers-the-overview-changing-times-part-seven/

 

[N. E. White]

Hey All,

I just heard on NPR about Google EBooks. I can't remember the names of those interviewed, but they all pretty much thought most folks would be reading via an electronic gadget of some sort in 10 years or less.

I haven't read every post here (and only skimmed Kat's essays - will do so in the future - good reference stuff), so I may be repeating something already said, but I found the tone of the publishing experts interviewed to be a little shocking. They really made it should like print will soon be dead.

Anyway...thought I'd share.

Has anyone used their service?

 

[Laer Carroll]

Print on Demand

In another thread I wrote this.

An ebook has many advantages over print books. But the reverse is true too. I can throw a paperback into my car's back seat and not worry that it will break. Or be taken by a smash-and-grab expert in the (literally) three seconds it takes to steal it.

Print books have other advantages over electronic books. No doubt you can think of several.

As prices of the ereaders drop more people will buy them and the ebooks and emagazines you can read on them. But it's not going to be quick. There are still many and enormous (mostly behind the scenes) changes which publishers have to make.

One advance which has not gotten much publicity is the hybrid technology of print-on-demand. How this will shake out we can only guess. Possibly it is fated to die. But it has the advantages of both epublishing and "ppublishing."

This includes tailoring the printed book/magazine to suit the buyer. Maybe they love a particular book but would like to have printed an alternate version with the sex scenes abridged - or expanded! Or they might request one of several different examples of cover art. Or they would pay a bit extra to have more durable covers. Or ... etc.

The future (as others in this forum have pointed out) will not be simple. The advance of technology gives us MORE choice, not less. So people will be able and willing to buy BOTH electronically and printed publications long into the future.

 

[Sparrow]

The future (as others in this forum have pointed out) will not be simple. The advance of technology gives us MORE choice, not less. So people will be able and willing to buy BOTH electronically and printed publications long into the future.

What I think you might be missing is the bigger picture, that books are losing meaning and with it the ability to shape the course of human events like they once did. It doesn't matter at all what form they arrive in, hardbound, electronic, audio, they just don't hold sway anymore.

Think of the progression of books like what happened to radio.
For a very brief time in human history radio was everything, it moved people to action, it was a portal to the outside world... as books once were. Unless technology delivers us a book that is more attractive to young people we will continue to whistle past the graveyard.

 

[mickyg]

What I think you might be missing is the bigger picture, that books are losing meaning and with it the ability to shape the course of human events like they once did. It doesn't matter at all what form they arrive in, hardbound, electronic, audio, they just don't hold sway anymore.

Think of the progression of books like what happened to radio.
For a very brief time in human history radio was everything, it moved people to action, it was a portal to the outside world... as books once were. Unless technology delivers us a book that is more attractive to young people we will continue to whistle past the graveyard.

But is there any hard data that shows that books in all their forms are steadily declining? I'm not sure a comparison to radio is completely fair here, given how long books and the written word has been around.

And it seems that Harry Potter and Twilight and the like have rejuvenated
reading amongst young adults, which will then (hopefully) continue reading into their adulthood and then be passed along to their own children.

 

[Laer Carroll]

First Espresso Book Machine in Continental Europe

Another small step in the increasing use of print-on-demand is described in the following link.

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/...resso-book-machine-in-continental-europe.html

 

[KatG]

Given that Hollywood does about half its films from book adaptations (just sat through Eat, Pray, Love -- don't see it,) I'm also not sure the book-radio comparison works. And in Britain, radio still has a stronger impact and has also morphed into online audio and podcasts.

You said once in a discussion, Sparrow, to a young poster, that he was young and so shouldn't be reading anyway, but going out and doing things. And I think that's the reality. Younger people are always going to be less inclined to read outside of school, for recreation, because it is not really a hormonal, social activity -- unlike video games, music and even movies. Kids are relatively easy to get involved with books now because it's all tied to the bigger complex, where books create t.v. shows which create more books and coloring books and toys and games and educational activities and room decor and movies, etc. Teen stuff has been useful now for t.v. and movies. Adult stuff is good for movies, t.v. a bit more now, and games.

But only about 25% of the adults and young adults are really reading regularly. The rest may pick up a book once in awhile, but the younger ones are more likely to be found playing games or dancing in a club or hanging out in a parking lot with booze, and the older ones vary in how much time they can spend reading -- as they get older, they tend to read more. And those numbers have remained pretty consistent since literacy and education increased in the West in the 1960's. Books never really influenced culture -- certainly not like radio, because for a long time, only about the top 10% of the populations read books. What would happen in later eras, for instance in the time of Dickens, is that authors of books would also write play adaptations of their books and go on lecture tours where they read their books aloud, which then allowed them to impact maybe 25% of the population.

I think we're going to see a lot of creative uses of books and books bundled with other forms, especially games. Books will remain deeply embedded in the culture, have their strongest impact in academia, and never be particularly dominant. I think music will continue to be dominant, and movies, and that games will get more dominant -- but how much is speculative, as the older you get, the fewer of the population plays games.

I don't know what's going to happen with these Espresso machines though. They seem to be creeping about, doing well for the company, but POD has not taken off like they expected it would. So I'm not sure how it will develop.

 

[Sparrow]

Given that Hollywood does about half its films from book adaptations (just sat through Eat, Pray, Love -- don't see it,) I'm also not sure the book-radio comparison works. And in Britain, radio still has a stronger impact and has also morphed into online audio and podcasts.

I think the problem of translating the intimacy of a book to the big screen is that the subsequent material is usually so silly and water'd-down that it really doesn't have lasting impact.

Take Braveheart... some people, even in Scotland no less, thought they had been given something of a history lesson. The movie is such a ridiculous distortion of historical events that it becomes nothing more than just another Hollywood send up. I saw it again in the recent Robin Hood movie with Russel Crowe... these screwy ideas of freedom and liberty somehow translating to our modern concepts of freedom and liberty.


For example, when my dad read The Man Who Would be King in the early 1930s, it was more than an adventure story to him. In a way all those adventure stories read as a young boy prepared him to fight in WWII, and upon his return to Scotland, leave his home for Canada, then America.

Do books still have that type of impact on young people?

 

[KatG]

Do books still have that type of impact on young people?

Yes. Rowling's main goal with Harry Potter was tackling racism, genocide and tribalism. Whatever else some may say of her skills, she managed that I think. An entire generation of kids grew up with that series whose impact was global, and more will do so probably for quite some time. Children are still reading Narnia. It's not converting them to Christians, but it is teaching them something about bravery, loyalty and compassion while giving them a fantastic world. There is more deliberately Christian oriented fiction that offers positive support for Christian teens.

Will Grayson, Will Grayson and Boy Meets Boy are two recent major YA bestsellers that have opened up dialogue about gay teens. And there is an increase in gay/lesbian stories rather than just the default of straight characters. That has an impact.

The tiny amount of non-white fiction has an impact, and the fact that it's still a tiny amount has unfortunately a negative impact. Hunger Games has very apt commentary on our current society. Environmentalism in YA and children's has been a part of the youth environmentalism movement. The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants is about female empowerment, growing up and sisterhood. Westerfeld's Uglies series also is SF packed with social commentary. The American Girl series does offer a somewhat more accurate history lesson that also shows that females were not invisible in history. 39 Clues teaches them puzzles, and so on.

And Judy Blume, well Judy Blume has had a major impact for about forty years in several categories. YA can tackle about every major issue you can think of and usually does. YA and children's authors often have very low status in the eyes of adults. But just about every YA author will tell you that he or she has had at least one, if not several fan letters that say their book saved a kid's life.

And when those books get on screen, the impact enormously widens. Braveheart was not based on a book. But other works are -- Bridge to Terabithia, for instance. How to Train Your Dragon. When those movies come out, the sales of the book jump to major levels as kids seek out the books. And we have ample evidence that they bring in new readers who then browse (because that is what fiction readers do,) which is how children's doubled in size and the YA area quadrupled in size in the wake of the Harry Potter movies. And once the movies are out of the theaters, adults may forget about them, but children don't because parents buy the DVD's and they grow up with them. There are toys, games, etc. And a book thus becomes a significant part of the culture. For teens, the product side is actually somewhat less, and more likely to involve clothing. But the books launch them into adult fiction -- the greatest impact of a hit YA novel? We get an uptick in readers who then stay readers. So the partnership between kids/YA fiction and Hollywood right now is pretty important, just as the partnership between SF authors and Hollywood in the 1960's and 1970's was pretty important to SF and helped SF have an impact on culture too.

 

[goldhawk]

[FYI] Kristine Kathryn Rusch: The Business of Publishing

I have place the list of her articles in my blog. She has just added part 8.

 

[Hereford Eye]

The trouble with the internet; no, the trouble with digital information is that it it ubiquitous, thorough, and unimaginative. Sitting before a computer with access, a person knows that all the information in the world is available if only they know the key words to unlock it. The key words are derivable so there is no excuse for not getting something, everything, right when you write. Checking yourself is a matter of key strokes, nothing more.
Modern poets grasp this, I'm certain. A poet can make the potential of the mating of monitor and keyboard come alive. The beauty of all that knowledge, the overpowering empowerment that comes with comprehension it's there for you, that you, alone, are the master of anything and everything. In your way and in your taste, you can realize your superhero potential.

There is a fatal flaw with image, I fear.

Imagine walking through the door of your favorite electronics megastore. There they are, against one wall, along six aisles, shelf upon shelf, all displaying the same screen, blinking in lock-step from screen to screen. Eleven inch to 27 inch, monitors square and oblong – no circular mirrors, though, though such might be a metaphor of rare design – blinking invitation, blinking temptation. Their output dances in your ears but your nose detects nothing more than the cleaning solvents used this morning to sterilize the products. Does your blood pound with excitement? Can you not wait to grasp a monitor; fondle it; open it; peer inside?
Contrast that with walking into your favorite library, your favorite book store, or your own personnel collection. There is a sight to meet you, tier upon tier, aisle after aisle. Your nose detects the subtle aroma of ink on page; your eyes meld and merge the multiple volumes awaiting your attention. Your ears detect others turning pages. Your mouth waters with anticipation. All the knowledge of the world is available to your touch. Your mind becomes stimulated by all its senses. More importantly, the mind's eye is activated. Imagination can grasp what awaits within the walls of this physically instantiated cyclopedia.
You can hold a book close, hold it dear, hold it in memory. You can turn the pages to re-excite the emotions experienced with the first read. Touch and smell and sight combine in the turning of the pages to re-ignite memory as strong and pure as the first encounter produced. Once read, its delights and terrors are available with a simple glimpse at its cover.

A book has a sensuality that digital information can never provide.

 

[txshusker]

A book has a sensuality that digital information can never provide.

Well said. My sentiments exactly.