Posts Tagged books

Kindle?

I’m curious to know what everyone thinks of the Kindle. It is Amazon’s wireless reading device that you can buy books from and read them right on the screen. I’m all for saving trees and everything, but I just think that there still needs to be a market for…real books.

The Kindle does have plenty of pros. It’s obviously so convenient; it’s like being able to bring your iPod on a plane instead of lugging a bunch of CDs. Now you can just bring the Kindle and leave all the books at home. But maybe instead of just leaving the books at home people will stop buying them altogether? I guess that is what upsets me about it. Even though it is convenient, cheaper, and it saves paper, I still have reservations. I think it will change the publishing industry dramatically, just like the iPod and downloading in general has changed the music industry.

I used to buy CDs like crazy and now I use iTunes a lot more. But when a CD comes out that I really love, I still buy the actual CD. So maybe that will be how it is for the Kindle? If someone really likes a book they will still buy it, but if they aren’t so sure they will buy the cheaper version for Kindle first. So maybe that isn’t so bad after all?

What do you think?

Comments (7)

Anne Lamott

“Seeing yourself in print is such an amazing concept: you can get so much attention without having to actually show up somewhere . . .You don’t have to dress up, for instance, and you can’t hear them boo you right away.” 

That is a quote from a book I just bought called “Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life” by Anne Lamott. I just started it last night and so far it seems really good. Here is an interview with the author. It isn’t a how-to book, although it contains a lot of helpful ideas and exercises to try, she is writing about her own experiences becoming a writer. So far it seems like it will be informative and pretty funny too!

Leave a Comment

Pondering Fiction vs. Film

        

Harry Potter Book vs. Movie

Harry Potter Book vs. Movie

   

 

          I hear it all the time— the cliché that the book version of a story is always better than the movie. In general, I agree that this is true. However, I have figured something out about myself over the years that I wonder if anyone can relate with.

 

            I have come to the conclusion that I like whichever version I m exposed to first better. In regards to Harry Potter, Twilight, One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest, P.S. I Love You, and so many others I loved the book and was thoroughly disappointed with the cinematic adaptation. This is common. However, with stories like The Notebook, A Walk to Remember, Pride and Prejudice, and True Blood in which I saw the movie before reading the book, I liked the movie better. (I know somewhere in my heart that if I had read the book first I would probably like it better).

 

            I guess this phenomenon makes sense because if you decide to read/see a book/movie’s counterpart than you probably enjoyed it very much. Inevitably the counterpart will incorporate some aspects (no matter how much they stray) that cause it to differ from the piece you initially fell in love with. And even though I know going into it that I will be automatically disappointed with the counterpart, I always have to see/read it anyway. I hope this makes sense—am I alone on this?

Comments (3)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.