The Evolving Act of Physically Reading In a Digitial World
I have joked with folks that my age cohort is the last of the analogs; the last generation that grew up without ubiquitous internet. My high school years “going online” started as something you had to do in the newfangled computer lab at school. By the time I graduated the townie kids were starting to get dialup at home and AOL was filling up mailboxes with starter discs. No such luck Up Yonder, outside of town, which finally got full blown modern internet that was usable for more than just slowly scrolling Mom’s Facebook on December 29th, 2023.
While the internet, and the then-force multiplier of the internet that was smart phones, have changed much in the last thirty-odd years since folks first started really using the internet, one thing I have really noticed is how digital words have changed how folks read. Not just content, but the physical act of reading. If you take college courses online now, as my kid is doing and I am getting ready to do once again, you usually do not even get books anymore. They are all online. What was once a novel new thing with Kindles and e-readers is now standard for higher education in many places.
The problem is, I have discovered I read differently when reading digitally. I have fiddled and experimented with my reading over the years since I have various kinds of reading to do. I must read a large amount of news and information to do my writing, commentary, and Heard Tell shows, which are obviously all digital. If I am taking classes or doing research, I must read for comprehension, both physical and digital. Reading for pleasure is different still.
What I have found is patterns that are universal to digital vs physical mediums reading regardless of reason. I read much faster digitally, and if reading for comprehension too fast. I read slower and retain more reading physical mediums. With digital, I do tend to focus in with that faster reading and press on to the end. Physically, I do tend to get more distracted for all the usual reasons that are inherent to a book or paper, like having to manipulate it by hand instead of just swiping or clicking.
The result of which has formed noticeable habits. I rarely read for pleasure on digital anymore. I hate having to read for comprehension digitally. Which is a problem in a digital, right-now world. I write everything online but when editing I will often print it out and go old school, pen-and-ink through the work so I slow down and really chew through it.
I am a writer who started out in the digital realm but later made a purposeful move to write for a local print newspaper back home. Writing for print just hits different on a couple of levels. It is just fun holding your work in your own hands. Being a smaller, rural area it is also interesting when the ladies at church bring my mother the cut out and marked up with commentary feedback of my pieces that rubbed them the wrong way. But writing for a newspaper also in subtle ways changes how I write, because for whatever reason knowing someone will physically be holding the words I am writing just does something to my brain in creating them. Which is a good thing, in my humble but accurate opinion, a necessary tether to real people in all too often dehumanizing realm of the interwebs.
While I know reading online will dominate the future, and my writing online will reach far more audience than print does, I cannot help but think about the difference in how I read, and how others might read differently also. The folded newspaper on my father’s desk may be archaic, but there is something there beyond just nostalgia. My youngest youngin and her friends are fairly obsessed with physical media – records, CDs, DVDs, even cassette tapes and VHS – and I cannot help but think for them it is something deeper. A generation that grew up completely digital craves holding things in their hands, possessing it, owning it, and having something old and slow once in a while in their ever-faster, very online world.
So, I am good with old and slow reading, writing, and media, in moderation and in understanding having small outposts of the past is fine and does not stop the time and tides of modern technology. Human nature may be changing and evolving, but not as fast as we think. Nothing wrong with taking our time, from time to time, and making sure we are swimming with the currents of change and not just drowning in them slowly.
This piece excerpted from the author’s SubStack Sunday post News, Notes, and Notions.
I read for pleasure in print media, and they will drag the books and magazines from my cold dead hands.
I read this forum digitally because I have little other choice.
I read journal articles for work by finding the PDF and printing it out. Usually after saving the PDF to a Reading file on my hard drive.
There is still something entrancing about paper with words printed on it.Report
I’m at about 50/50 now for books: about half on my e-reader and about half in print. I don’t think I read differently between the two anymore, though I certainly did when I first got a reader about a decade ago, because there are no physical clues to indicate how much you’ve read and how much you have left to read, like you get with the way a book looks and feels as you read through it.
Mostly, I think splitting allows me to read way more than I would if I were just reading physical books. One of the problems I had with physical books only was that I’d read a review, or a recommendation, or hear the author speak, or whatever, and get very excited about a book, order it, or put it on a list to order, but by the time it got to me, or I got to it, the excitement had worn off. Now I can order a book and start reading it instantly, which I frequently do (just did this with Ajay Singh Chaudhary’s The Exhausted of the Earth, which I recommend). So the e-reader works out great, and I can still be more deliberative with print books.Report
When I got on long vacations, I bring several paper books. I think I read 4 books on the plane coming and going from my last two long international flights. Hardcopy is better.Report
Do you bring them back when you are done or leave them behind for the next person?Report
Mostly bring them back, if they are good. Otherwise leave.Report
my comprehension seems worse when I read off a screen. I read a lot of research articles and I have gone back* to printing out the pdfs, reading them, and taking reading notes in a bound journal as I go.
I have a very large number of physical books. I have a kindle-type app on my phone but never use it, even when traveling – I carry paper books with me.
I also find i get eyestrain after reading a screen too long, and my 55 year old eyes combined with the distance of my work monitor from my face is not ideal; I often have to magnify sites that have smaller text
(*after a “save the earth” obsessed former colleague fundamentally bullied me into not printing stuff out because it “wasted paper.” After they retired I realized that it didn’t matter any more, so I started printing again. Also the whole “all my little pdfs cost less to the planet than one CEO’s plane ride to go get lunch with his golfing buddies)Report
I really cannot recommend the Paperwhite (or any reader like it) enough. It’s not backlit, so it doesn’t tire out or irritate your eyes, and is designed in such a way as to make the experience more like reading a physical book (e.g., I think one of the things that hurts comprehension when reading on most screens is the amount of text and other information that you are constantly taking in, but the Paperwhite looks like a normal book page of text). It’s less ideal when reading PDFs, because they’re not formatted for the screen, but I still prefer it to reading off a computer or non-reader tablet screen, and because I hate printing things (I just end up with huge piles of journal articles), I end up reading a lot of research articles and essays on it, as well as books and text books that require a great deal of attention. If I try to read them on pretty much any other screen, my comprehension level drops dramatically, but on the Paperwhite, I don’t think there’s a real difference in comprehension from a print version.
And it’s very light and thin, so it usually doesn’t take up as much space in or add as much weight to a bag when traveling.Report
Professionally, damn near everything I do is on a screen rather than on paper; when something is on paper I typically reduce it to electrons because these are much easier to work with.
Personally, I like reading a physical book because it isn’t electronic. It is simply a different psychic experience to have a physical book. I want that experience.Report
Professionally, some times I wind up with three printed technical papers, or three volumes of the Colorado Revised Statutes, spread out across the desktop, each with a full page or two “displayed”. Plus a pad of paper where I’m taking notes in my cramped little handwriting. Flipping back and forth in one of the papers with my left hand while I hold a pen in my right and never asking, “Where’s the f*cking scrollbar for this document?” 4K screens have gotten cheap enough one of these days I may try an actual desktop-sized screen as an experiment.
I have a pair of computer glasses. I nagged the ophthalmologist into writing a prescription for that distance rather than the typical near or far numbers they write. I may have mentioned it before, but at age 70 my vision, both near and far, has improved in the last year to a degree the ophthalmologist can measure it. Karma is a b*tch, as they say, so that concerns me.Report
Here’s another consideration: storage volume. Several years ago — perhaps many years ago, by now — I started planning for physically downsizing. Several hundred physical books, mostly fiction, have been replaced with e-books*. All of them fit nicely on a single DVD. They’re now searchable. And at least the epub version of things can be displayed in my choice of fonts, my choice of character sizes and line spacing, my choice of paragraph formatting. I won’t criticize anyone who prefers the tactile aspect of paper books, but that comes with lots of disadvantages.Report
The story of (I believe) Paul Allen’s personal library is illustrative of the downside of this approach. When he died, the licenses on all of his electronic media died along with him, and his legatees were denied a substantial portion of the library he’d assembled. Maybe this is a matter of little moment to some, but it might matter to others. I offer it merely as a factor to consider.Report