Go ahead, bite the Big Apple, don’t mind the maggots – says more in seven seconds than any video

With Apple’s Novel Acquisition, A Chance To Reinvent The Book | TechCrunch

That feedback loop is critical, because books face incredible competition from other media for our attention. It’s easy to spend the afternoon watching videos on YouTube or Netflix, or zone out listening to music from Spotify and Pandora. Using algorithms and simple user interfaces, these sites actively encourage us to move from one piece of content to the next, never giving us a reason to stop consuming.

But books have been a far harder medium to stream, and for good reason. They have many qualities that make them difficult to assemble together on a consumption platform. Each one is lengthy, creating an immediate burden on the part of the reader before even the first page is opened. And they often start slow, since exposition of a world generally leads. There is no equivalent to a seven-second video that can provide an immediate payoff in the first moments of interaction.

That’s the format as it has been in the past, but who says that the format has to remain stagnant? Let me give two imagined examples of what we could do. One option may be to borrow the old concept of serial fiction. Many of the most popular works in fiction today come from authors who pump out reams of pages. Given the nearly constant production of this material, why can’t we provide a channel so that these writers can write an on-going series in a serialized format? It’s sort of the textual equivalent of a soap opera, which is ironic since many of these popular novels are romantic or criminal.

Typical geek cluelessness about a non-scientific field – art, to be specific. Dude doesn’t actually understand the role the text of a novel plays in the mind of the reader. Text is a blueprint, a clue: I write a line: “The fireplace loomed, tall, ancient, cracked, smoke-blackened…” But the fireplace you see in your mind is entirely your own creation, and it is far more detailed than any “immersive process” could ever be.

…much of the confusion on the part of people who don’t get old-fashioned reading is that they just never practiced it enough to get good at it.

Pretty much it – except, I think it goes a bit deeper than that, into the whole concept of what reading is all about – the actual interaction involved in the “act of reading” itself, and the mental processes that result.

I have two mid-thirties-aged children, whose primary vocations are licensed professional realtor (she’s the older, by a year-plus, and is, relatively-speaking, pretty successful) and certified automotive mechanic (he’s got multiple certifications, is working – slowly – towards more). Both are what I would term “functional-level readers” – neither was particularly brilliant in formal schooling, in fairly large part (I’ve always contended) because both (for a variety of reasons, though none of them apparently due to vision problems nor anything like dyslexia) found reading a difficult set of skills to acquire and practice. Therefore, they both read well enough to do what they need to do – to function well enough within their environment, to study and learn what they need for their respective jobs, etc. – but…not beyond that point. I would contend, also, that, for a number of reasons, they are quite typical of their generation – and the one just coming up, now, behind them – in that respect.

They’re intelligent enough – in some ways, far smarter than “average” (whatever that term really means) – but, they read – are “literate” – only slightly above, or at, the point of vocational and avocational functionality. Reading was always kind of hard for them…and, in school, there was no particular pressure for them to get better at it, beyond a certain point – mostly, no penalties for poor spelling or grammar or writing skills; very few really difficult-to-read or understand books or tests, etc….so – they took no pleasure, mostly, from reading, from books or other printed matter, and therefore they never read (still don’t) as a pleasurable activity, simply for the act – and the mental images that resulted – of reading.

Whether they are aware of it or not – and I strongly suspect it’s unconscious for them – I think that’s what’s at work, here, with the people who want to “stream” books. They don’t see the act of reading as involving pleasurable actions – merely functionality: the acquisition of information, as rapidly and as effortlessly as possible. They fail to perceive any pleasurable aspect in the reading itself – the thought of such quite possibly never occurs to them – and therefore their objective is to deliver the information involved (the reading content; just the facts, ma’am, always just the facts) as quickly as possible.

“Stream” on!…

Comments

Go ahead, bite the Big Apple, don’t mind the maggots – says more in seven seconds than any video — 4 Comments

Billy Hollis on July 29, 2014 4:58 am at July 29, 2014 4:58 am said:

There is no equivalent to a seven-second video that can provide an immediate payoff in the first moments of interaction.

Wrong. Opening paragraph from Friday by RAH:

As I left the Kenya Beanstalk capsule he was right on my heels. He followed me through the door leading to Customs, Health, and Immigration. As the door contracted behind him I killed him.

If you can’t read that in five seconds, you are a slow reader.

I think much of the confusion on the part of people who don’t get old-fashioned reading is that they just never practiced it enough to get good at it. Both reading speed and imagination to visualize the story get better and better as one absorbs more stories via print.
kennycan on July 29, 2014 5:41 am at July 29, 2014 5:41 am said:

Added a title. Maybe a little presumptuous of me but I hope it caught the spirit.
Bill Quick on July 29, 2014 7:10 am at July 29, 2014 7:10 am said:

Thanks, kenny. I seem to be suffering from a bad case of missing titleitis these days.
J.S. Bridges on July 29, 2014 12:44 pm at July 29, 2014 12:44 pm said:

…much of the confusion on the part of people who don’t get old-fashioned reading is that they just never practiced it enough to get good at it.

Pretty much it – except, I think it goes a bit deeper than that, into the whole concept of what reading is all about – the actual interaction involved in the “act of reading” itself, and the mental processes that result.

I have two mid-thirties-aged children, whose primary vocations are licensed professional realtor (she’s the older, by a year-plus, and is, relatively-speaking, pretty successful) and certified automotive mechanic (he’s got multiple certifications, is working – slowly – towards more). Both are what I would term “functional-level readers” – neither was particularly brilliant in formal schooling, in fairly large part (I’ve always contended) because both (for a variety of reasons, though none of them apparently due to vision problems nor anything like dyslexia) found reading a difficult set of skills to acquire and practice. Therefore, they both read well enough to do what they need to do – to function well enough within their environment, to study and learn what they need for their respective jobs, etc. – but…not beyond that point. I would contend, also, that, for a number of reasons, they are quite typical of their generation – and the one just coming up, now, behind them – in that respect.

They’re intelligent enough – in some ways, far smarter than “average” (whatever that term really means) – but, they read – are “literate” – only slightly above, or at, the point of vocational and avocational functionality. Reading was always kind of hard for them…and, in school, there was no particular pressure for them to get better at it, beyond a certain point – mostly, no penalties for poor spelling or grammar or writing skills; very few really difficult-to-read or understand books or tests, etc….so – they took no pleasure, mostly, from reading, from books or other printed matter, and therefore they never read (still don’t) as a pleasurable activity, simply for the act – and the mental images that resulted – of reading.

Whether they are aware of it or not – and I strongly suspect it’s unconscious for them – I think that’s what’s at work, here, with the people who want to “stream” books. They don’t see the act of reading as involving pleasurable actions – merely functionality: the acquisition of information, as rapidly and as effortlessly as possible. They fail to perceive any pleasurable aspect in the reading itself – the thought of such quite possibly never occurs to them – and therefore their objective is to deliver the information involved (the reading content; just the facts, ma’am, always just the facts) as quickly as possible.

“Stream” on!…