To me a book is an item used to store data. There are
textbook and story books, but they are only important because of the content
that is in them. I believe that books are like computers, they are only as
useful as the software that is in them not the outside layer. When Nancy Jo
Sales says that there is something special about books and their physicality I think
she is the type of person that would judge a book by its cover since she is
only interested on what is the layer of the book rather than the information in
it. When I read a book on my e-reader vs a book, I can’t tell the difference.
The only variation the e-reader has that a book doesn’t is that I can carry
thousands of book everywhere I go. For a book though, it can get lost, stolen,
and destroyed due to overuse unlike the e-reader which will have the books
backed up into the computer even if it does get misplaced.
When Tom Piazza asks himself the question “Why is it
important whether you get your information from a computer of some sort or from
a physical book?” the bias is very clear. I would first start off saying that
an e-reader is not a computer, and that it is rather a device used to carry
information. When he talks about keeping tradition by reading physical books it
doesn’t make sense. Just like how e-readers
are replacing books to make it easier for someone to read, people invented
paper creating books that replaced stone tablet writing 1000 years ago because they
wanted to make it easier for the reader, and since they got tired of etching
words on walls. So, keeping tradition? You don’t see us writing everything on
stone tablets, so we should accept technology as it changes.