Book History

Contents:

The Book In Scoiety

The Broadview Reader In Book History

In these excerpts, the author explains how writing systems are one of, if not the, most important technological human development. Writing systems popped up in three distinct places in the ancient world, including as hieroglyphs in Egypt and Mesopotamia around 3700 BCE. Papyrus was the material most commonly used as writing material, but was then replaced with parchment, which was made with animal skin. Paper was used after that, and credited with being invented in China. The next significant change in writing systems that the author notes is with the ancient Greeks, and their invention of vowels added to their borrowed alphabet, therefore bringing about an increase in art at the time. Much of the poetry, music, and literature created around that time is still heralded today.

The excerpt by Febre and Martin focuses on the visual changes in the appearance of the book from 1450 to around 1800. The invention of the printing press meant a change in the method of production, and the rate at which books could be produced, but did not mean radical changes in appearances were imminent. Originally, incunabula were produced with the intent of looking as identical to hand-made manuscripts as possible; this included using fonts that replicated handwriting. For a time, there were four main fonts used in printing books, and each of them was preferred for different types of books, and for different audiences; blackletter, gothic, “bastard” gothic, and “littera antiqua” or roman script. The roman type eventually became the most commonly used font, to cut on production costs.

These authors pay significant attention to the evolution of the title page as an element of the book. Title pages weren’t used for manuscripts, and as a result were not a part of incunabula. There may be a “colophon” at the end of the book containing some basic information such as name of the printer, place of printing, title, and name of the author. Printers also used Printer’s marks specific to their printing houses as a form of identification. Title pages similar to the way we recognize them today came from a desire to fill the blank recto at the beginning of the book, sometime around 1480. By 1550, the visual appearance of the book had adapted even further: they began to be numbered by pages instead of by leaf, and they began to feature a full page of text rather than the two-column layout.

The printed book had a complicated relationship with illustrations. In the early years, illustrations or miniatures were still produced by hand, they way they had been for manuscripts. Illustrations in books stalled in popularity in the 17th century, before picking up again in the following years.

By the 20th century, every rich person wanted their own library, and the binding industry had to keep up with demand. Over the years this industry had seen a switch from monastic binders to private binders, and new techniques of decorating these bindings were developed. Books became so popular and stored in such mass that the practice of placing them vertically on shelves was adopted, hence the title being displayed on the spine.

In the following excerpt, Twyman discusses the more practical side of printing. He explains that the printing process is separated into two stages; origination, and multiplication. He defines origination as a kind of “pre-press” stage, and the multiplication as what may also be called a print run. He lists three different methods for printing; relief, intaglio, and planographic, all of which have to do with how the ink was applied to the paper. Twyman also cites the late 18th century as being the time by which detailed printed pictures and printed words were finally combined.

Robinson begins this section by explaining the process through which Gutenberg and other early printers went about creating their prints as culture shifted from scribal-based to print-based. Gutenberg had brought his metalwork skills to his printing business, inventing moveable metal type born from this background. The process involved; carving and engraving a metal punch with the desired letter; stamping that punch into a copper matrix; and pouring alloy into a mold around that matrix. Multiple of these letters together constituted a font, with the majuscules stored in the upper-case and minuscules in the lower-case within the print shop. For setting the letters the printer would need a composing stick to arrange lines of type, which were then set and lined by leads to justify the lines. This method of printing allowed for easier correction than scribing, as a proof paper could be checked by a proof-reader before being reproduced in mass quantities. Gutenberg had compilied several small methods and technologies, along with his own inventions – including his screw-press which controlled pressure to make his printer consistent and effective- to completely revolutionize the book production industry.

In terms of the popularity of the printed word, the Reformation had a big part in fast-tracking the industry. Since lots of printed material was needed to spread new ideas, doctrines, and literature, those involved in the Reformation needed to produce these things quickly and in bulk. Printing was much faster and more consistent than scribes were, so that became the preferred method of evangelising. Sir Isaac Newton’s work became the first major scholarly texts ever published, showing how printing was making its mark on every aspect of study.

In this passage, Eisenstein dissects the impact that the shift from scribal culture to print culture had on society – or more specifically, why it is difficult to determine this impact, and why no other scholars seem to be doing it, despite the importance it would appear to have on human history. According to Eisenstein, the shift to print culture was incredibly low-key, and she eventually ends this excerpt comparing the evolutionary verses revolutionary ways at looking at the invention of printing.

Eisenstein posits that the reason it is so difficult for someone living in the modern era to understand scribal and print culture when the turnover first began, is because it is impossible to see the world through the eyes and with the mindset of someone living in that era. Scribal culture was so fluid that it is hard to find consistencies or trends over time, and there is no “average” experience to base research off.

According to some of the author’s sources, early printers like Gutenberg should be considered more closely related with early capitalists, rather than early literary innovators, given the wild success of the technologically advanced printing system. But Eisenstein says that there is a middle ground where these printers belong, where they exist as both business oriented and literary minded.

Anyone who has studied print history knows that the reformation was important to the growth of print culture. Protestants needed ways to spread their material quickly and in mass quantities, and the printing press allowed them to do that. Eisenstein suggests that because this movement was so historically significant, it decreased the attention paid to later developments in printing culture. This is why it is so difficult to find studies on the consequences of printing culture past the reformation era. Eisenstein ends this section claiming that the study of print is vast and limitless, which explains why certain topics relating to it are so hard to pin down.

In this excerpt, Adrian Johns refutes Eisenstein’s claims that the invention of print culture was revolutionary change, rather than an evolutionary one. Johns’s main gripes deal with Eisenstein saying that cultural change came immediately with the invention of print. Johns spends a great deal of time discussing the illegal practice of pirating books and re-printing them illegally, something that would appear to be all the rage back when the printing press was first invented. In the modern age we can be almost certain that any copy of a published book we read, no matter what continent or country we are in, is identical to every other copy of the book in the world; in this way we know to trust the publishing industry. But Johns says this wasn’t always the case.

Before explaining some examples of book piracy, Johns says that he believes “print culture” had to have been a gradual, evolutionary change from scribal culture, rather than a drastic, sudden one. A lot of hard work and innovation had already gone into the idea of the printing press before Gutenberg put it all together, and it is very irresponsible to ignore all that labour and time. Print culture is also evolutionary, he says, because of how universally recognized it is now. There is no evidence of other failed attempts at a similar kind of technological leap anywhere in history – thus proving that printing grew out of scribal culture.

Johns points out the overlap in practices between scribal and print culture; for instance, books being illegally re-printed, altered, and copied were still problems in the early days of printing. Just because a new means of production had been invented didn’t mean that the culture changed immediately, as Eisenstein seems to suggest. Johns uses the examples of Tycho Brahe and Galileo – two stories with very different ends – to explain that piracy was still a big problem that did not disappear with the invention of the printing press.

Johns finishes his argument by saying that the fixity we ascribe to books these days was not always the case, and books were not always reliable sources. The culture of print and books shifted gradually and organically, not revolutionarily like Eisenstein states.

Darnton begins his examination into the history of books by looking at when and where they fit into other fields of study . He says that the study of book history has been rapidly expanding, and that it overlaps with many other disciplines. Likewise, many other fields of study find themselves connected to book history in some way. According to Darnton, book history as a study began in the 19th century. He has developed a model for analyzing how books began and subsequently spread (p.234). This model includes six main elements/stages that Darnton discusses further at the end of his essay; authors, publishers, printers, shippers, booksellers, and readers.

Darnton explains that the study of book history can become so specialized and narrow that the parts become separated from the whole. To look at the bigger picture in its entirety, he examines the publishing history of Voltaire’s Questions sur l’Encyclopedie, specifically relating to the bookseller Isaac-Pierre Rigaud of Montpellier. Rigaud had to go to great lengths to get this book imported, dealt with shady printers, struggled with different editions floating around and being sold by other booksellers, all to make a profit in his bookstore. This example helps put Darnton’s model into a practical perspective. He breaks this anecdote down into four things relating to each phase of the cycle: other activities a person has underway at during the cycle, other people at the same point in other cycles, other people at other points in the same cycle, and other elements of society.

The conclusion of the essay is more generally about the study of book history, and questions that may be asked by scholars. His main points are that books cannot be contained, the history of books is interdisciplinary, and that books are not just a part of history, they make history.

This chapter, on authorship, seeks to answer some of the questions posed in Darnton’s article “What is the History of Books?” Specifically, questions about when authorship as we know it today came about, and what the career of an author was like before that point. Robinson points out that the career of an author that we recognize today is a fairly recent invention. For a long time, authors were supported by patrons, usually wealthy supporters of the arts who would fund the author as they continued their works. Patronage had its advantages and disadvantages. It meant that authors did not have to worry about supporting themselves financially, and gave them a kind of safety net. But it could also restrict an author’s free will if their patron had their own ideas about what they should be writing or not writing. Even before the idea of patronage, the concept of authorship was not always important; it was not immediately assumed that the person who created a work should be or needed to be credited; instead it was seen as contributing collectively to the well of cultural knowledge.

Up until the nineteenth century, it was common for most authors to conceal their identities. This is a practice that, while not as common, is still used a fair bit within the modern world of writing. Authors could hide their identities using pseudonyms/pen names, abbreviating their names with initials, or remaining completely anonymous. Sometimes, to link previous works to an anonymous authors new books, the author would be credited as “the author of ¬¬¬[book name].” There are a few different reasons why authors would have wanted to conceal their identities, but the most common ones where; to avoid criticism, if the writing was controversial or scandalous; so as not to distract the reader’s attention from the work itself; to change their pseudonym to fit the genre of the writing; or to put themselves on equal footing with other authors, such as the Bronte sisters adopting male pen names.

Robinson goes on to explain when and how the concept of copyright came about – around the beginning of the 18th century – and the effect it had on authors. Authors could now profit from their book sales, and have more control over how their books were spread. Robinson also touches on subscription publication; essentially a form of crowd-sourcing to fund an author’s next book. Literary agents also changed the writing/publishing industry with their rise in popularity in the mid 19th century. Agents could negotiate on behalf of the authors they represented to ensure better deals and contracts for their work.

The most recent adaptations within the publishing industry concern translations and adaptations. Translations of one book from its original language into new ones opened up wider audiences for already popular books. And adaptations, such as into movies or plays, as well as audiobooks, means more people being exposed to works of literature.

Finally, Robinson discusses self-publishing. If an author’s works are too controversial or for whatever reason are not published by official publishers, a writer can choose to self-publish and distribute their books. Self-publishing also opens up the opportunity for an author’s work to be noticed by publishers, and picked up for a contract.

Robinson describes the 20th century as the “age of the book”, due to the increase in paperback books, public libraries, critic influence on the public, and mail-order book clubs. Big box stores began popping up in the 1970s, and the digital landscape of reading also changed; anticipating a shift to e-books within the near future. This did eventually come true, as e-books overtook sales of print books in 2011. It also became possible for a person to write, edit, style, and produce a book entirely on their own for the first time in history, with the help of a personal computer.

Prior to this, an increase in literacy in the 1700s had helped the popularity of books grow. If more people are literate, more people will buy books. Literacy rates increased with the formation of public education systems around the world, as well as libraries switching over from private to public spaces. Just before what Robinson calls the “paperback revolution”, Periodicals were the main kind of print consumed by most people – basically magazines with extremely specialized content, that offered subscription and mail services that made them very easy to acquire. This paperback revolution was caused by a need to make book production and distribution cheaper. And though the method had existed previously, it really took off in the 20th century. Explosively popular genres of paperback books in the mid century also pushed the paperback trend, such as the mystery novels of Arthur Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie, and later the “pulp fiction” (named for the type of paper it was printed on) detective novel.

This chapter’s focus is on the bookseller’s role in the book circuit. Robinson says that this faction of the book industry was originally formed in the nineteenth century, and has been evolving ever since. One of the main problems faced by readers trying to source books was that living far away from major metropolitan areas meant books were harder to find, and not as readily available. As Robinson said, bookselling has been around for a while, though the methods used by booksellers to bring product to their customers has changed over the years. Independent bookstores were mostly overtaken by smaller chains in suburban malls, which were then overtaken by big box stores. Mail-order book sellers also played a role in the diminished success of independent sellers. And then, of course, Amazon.com completely destroyed the competition.

Independent bookstores have been struggling for a while, and the number of independent stores has been diminishing in almost every country. To stay open, many independents have had to diversify; offering their spaces for public events and functions. Another way to stay afloat is to specialize in something; genre-fiction bookstores with a strong theme attract dedicated customers. Used and antiquarian bookstores also fulfill a specific niche that keeps them in business.

Bookstore chains made an impact in the late twentieth century, placing themselves in shopping malls in North America. They offered a wide selection and vast inventory. They were also less intimidating than smaller bookstores, easier to navigate, and more convenient.

The big box stores also came around in the late twentieth century. This new type of store could be the single destination for books in a town or city, as they had the ability to provide a huge selection of books across an array of genres to all customers. They adopted several practices to make the shopping experience relaxing, such as smaller bookcases, places to sit, warmer lighting, and the in-store coffee shops that have now become a staple. The idea was to make the store a place that customers would want to spend time in, and subsequently find more items to purchase while browsing.

Online booksellers were more successful than any of the previous sellers. Amazon began as just a book-selling company, and has now branched out into every other type of merchandise. They have distribution centres around the world, and ships to nearly every country in the world. Their selection is almost unlimited and didn’t require customers to leave their house. Amazon added functions to allow shoppers to “browse” books online before purchasing. And while there are other internet booksellers in some competition with Amazon, no one has yet been able to match their success.

Robinson then moves on to distributors and wholesalers. They are also factions of the book circuit that emerged in the nineteenth century, and they provide the link between publishers and booksellers. Because of the system that exists to get books from the publishers to the book stores, books that do not sell can be returned to the publishers through the distributors, making books a good that can be un-sold.

Aside from distributors and wholesalers, there is another way to connect publishers to booksellers; book fairs. Book fairs have been around for a long time, since the Middle Ages. The Frankfurt Fair predates Gutenberg. These fairs are meant to draw readers, sellers, authors, and publishers together.

In this chapter, Robinson intends to focus on various types of censorship since the invention of print, and how that censorship has affected the relationship between books and society. There are many possible ways to enforce censorship, such as taxes, tariffs, fines, and penalties – all of the options can yield both positive and negative results. One of the earliest ways the state-imposed censorship was on a very local scale; limiting the sale of paper and requiring licenses for presses, all of which resulted in businesses having to shut down or move to another location. The first censorship laws were enacted in the early 16th century – most commonly these laws were used for religious purposes, so that the church could control what information was being spread about them. For a while any print pertaining to theology needed to be approved by a bishop before being printed. In terms of other milestones enforcing censorship, King Louis XIV made book trading a lot more difficult in France, and in 1765 the Stamp Act contributed to the American revolution.

As the number of printers increased, trade associations, such as the Stationers’ Guild, became ways for printers to protect their businesses and ward off new ones. Patents were also invented, as a way to protect printers’ businesses, in Venice in 1469.

Robinson now focuses on the consequences from civil and religious authority that were faced by those who ignored censorship laws. Censorship, whether enforced by civil or religious authority can be enacted either before or after publication. It is usually enforced on a local level. In 1515, Pope Leo X created a ruling stating that all printers needed approval for each text they printed, publishable by fine, suspension, or excommunication. This rule has remained in effect, in some form or another, until the year 1966. Treasonous works were also banned, thanks to Queen Elizabeth I in England; due to the 1793 Law of Suspects around forty thousand people were executed.

Sometimes state and religious censorship doesn’t need to be enforced; self-censorship exists when regulations are created within the industry itself without outside interference. Robinson cites the Comic Magazine Association of America as one such industry.

Within more recent history than Queen Elizabeth, there are many examples of censorship being used as a tool for and as a result of world conflict. Robinson examines censorship in the modern era, starting with The Third Reich, which was known for burning books in Germany that were deemed counter to the Nazi agenda. It also worked as an intimidation tactic, causing people to voluntarily burn their own books. It also saw authors’ entire works being banned, and effectively banning the author themselves. There was also a wave of “blacklisting” within the print and film industry during the cold war – people who produced material that could be seen as pro-communist were unable to find work again, and resorted to using pseudonyms or abandoning their careers.

As has been mentioned in past readings, copyright laws have always been intended to protect printers rather than authors, and was first created in England in 1710. For a long time, copyright did not extend across country borders, meaning that piracy was unaffected by many laws if it was done outside of the country of the work’s origin. The Berne Convention in 1887 took strides to fix this, save for the USA, who did not attend. A truly effective international copyright law wasn’t created until 1952.

Robinson outlines the four conditions in which works can be reproduced under the umbrella of “fair use”, and the four situations under which fair use applies. The conditions are dependant on; the nature and purpose the work is being used for; the nature of the original work; how much of the work will be used; and if it will have any effect on the original work. Quotation in scholarly works, summaries in news broadcasts, legislative use, and library reproduction always fall under fair use.

Robinson ends the chapter by speaking about propaganda, which ties into censorship in the modern era as previously discussed. Propaganda goes to show how much power a state can have over book culture.

In this essay, Greg attempts to answer the questions “What is bibliography?” According to him, bibliography has moved over time from being an art to a science. Treating bibliography as a science rather than an art affects both our understanding and outlook on the subject. What exactly our understanding and outlook will become, Greg will discuss. Greg also notes that in his view, from a bibliographer’s perspective, the different between written manuscripts and printed books is irrelevant, and bibliography applies equally to both types. To be a successful bibliographer, Greg states that one needs to know the elements of bibliography, and have an intimate knowledge of some areas, and a familiarity with others. Bibliography is a vast area of research, touching bases with many other fields of study. Greg restates his point about bibliography, saying that if it were to ignore either printed books or written manuscripts, it would lose more than half of its significance. As well as needing to know about many different areas of study, bibliographers also have to be able to ignore the literary contents of the work they are bibliography, as it is irrelevant. Greg mentions that descriptive/systematic bibliography is the classification of individual books according to some guiding principle, not just the opinion of the bibliographer.

When it comes to editing, Greg sees this a scientific and literary process. Editors also need to be well versed in a variety of skills, but are not the same as bibliographers. Critical bibliography is a whole separate thing, with an extensive history unto itself. Greg then goes on a tangent about how one day he dreams of bibliography being taught in university, and exactly what aspects will be explained to students in which order. He believes that bibliography is an important and fascinating part of literary study, but a huge undertaking to explain.

The term “copy-text” was originally invented by Ronald Brunlees McKerrow to mean “the early text of a work which an editor selected as the basis of his own.” With that in mind, Greg spends this essay discussing which version of a book or manuscript is the “copy-text,” and which one should be referred to as the over-arching authority above all other copies. Classical scholars first posited that the original text, usually a manuscript, had this authority. Karl Lachmann introduced a scientific basis for deciding which text had authority – prior to this, it was depended on the scholar’s opinion. After that, scholars thought that whichever text was generally more correct should always be followed as adhered to, an idea which Greg strongly disagrees with. One of Greg’s points is that scribes could easily make mistakes in their work, and so nothing produced by a scribe can be considered perfect. According to Greg, “misspellings” of old works of literature should not always be updated with modern “correct” language, as these “mistakes” reflect the context in which the author was writing

Greg’s main point on this topic has to do with the difference between “accidentals” and “substantive features.” The difference between these two things will affect one’s opinion on a manuscript or work of literature. Accidentals are spelling errors, punctuation and grammatical mistakes. Substantive features are corrections and amendments that change the meaning of a sentence, and therefore the meaning of the work as a whole. Greg gives many examples of accidentals verses substantive features. In short, copy-text rules with accidentals, but choosing between differing substantive reading is up to the theory of textual criticism.

This excerpt from Tanselle is mainly a response and extension on Greg’s previous essays. Tanselle is mostly focused on authorial intention; what it is, and how it affects bibliography. According to Tanselle, the goal of scholarly editors is to discover exactly what an author wrote, and how he wished the public to see it. Tanselle recognizes the main question regarding that statement, what would be the best way to accomplish that goal, but doesn’t plan to answer it completely on his own. Tanselle claims that Greg’s writing was really talking about the topic of authorial intent, whether Greg realized it or not. While it seems simple enough, the idea of “final authorial intent” isn’t clean or neat at all.

In the case of an author making a revised edition of an earlier work, Tanselle’s view is that an editor should always be focused on what the author wrote and changed, not whether that change was a good decision. Tanselle also notes that a revised edition may be considered the new copy-text of that work, provided that both accidentals and substantives have been considered in the amendments.

Tanselle then provides two situations in which scholarly editing becomes difficult; when editors cannot tell who made the changes, and when the changes may not actually reflect the author’s intention.

An editor must look at the meaning of a work, not just the things they assume to be errors. There are many kinds of intention to be considered (programmatic, active, final), and the author must act like a critic in order to complete the process. Simply looking for obvious errors will not get the job done. Editing has to be at least somewhat critical.

As previously mentioned, editors may have to account for changes in a work that were made by someone other than the original author. Tanselle provides the example of Sherwood Anderson’s A Story Teller’s Story, a work which includes revisions from three separate people. Editors need to be well rounded and knowledgeable in order to properly inform their judgements and editorial decisions. They must also consider whether an author approved of the changes made to their book, or whether they simply accepted them. Tanselle is adamant that intention cannot be passed on or projected onto another person – even under explicit instructions, authorial intent cannot be carried out perfectly by anyone other than the original author.

Thinking of “final” intention purely relating to chronological order of editions/revisions runs into problems when the changes are so drastic the work is considered entirely new, or when the author has approved of many different/alternative readings. For example, while Walt Whitman claimed his final version of Leaves of Grass made before he died was the only true version, he still published the other versions at that point in time and they hold their own as completed versions of their time.

Tanselle now asks two questions: what does “intention” really mean, and is it important for the author’s wording to be recorded if changes have been made by others? To answer the latter question simply: yes. Tanselle leaves the first questions unanswered, as he has many thoughts but no definitive answers as to what “intention” really is. He is sure, however, that one must do justice to their author and the text, and that an editor must also play the role of the critic.

McGann’s main point of this essay is to explain how electronic/technological developments in the literacy field are both desirable and inevitable. He is quick to point out that he is talking about physical characteristics of literary works – specifically as “instruments of scientific knowledge.” McGann is not talking about poetry in this piece. The argument in favour of new digital tools is twofold: for obvious reasons, digital methods are faster and more easily available to those with a computer; the digital change is also inevitable, and it makes more sense to join in than to fight it. McGann uses the example of the online Oxford English Dictionary as his example of how/why digitalization is useful and important. Producing new editions of books physically is difficult; this is why many tools and resources have already been established to help the process (annotated bibliography being one of them.) But editing is made easier through “hyper editing” aids, according to McGann. Online archives can store multiple works and resources in the same place, much more convenient than using physical copies.

With the use of digital means, it is easier to preserve the original vision of a poet or author when their work involves more than just text. In the case of Blake and Dickinson, as McGann explains, the effect of their writing is lost when unusual punctuation, use of space on the paper, and other non-text elements are not translated. Codices place constraints on the texts they are presenting, and can misrepresent the original document.

McGann is also a fan of the search functions made possible by the internet, as well as the ability to store information in one place, and add to it later. Such as in the case of The Rossetti Archive, hypertext can be “published” in an incomplete form and expanded/revised later on. McGann says that hypertext is not a sign of “the Last Days” anymore than moveable type was. And he believes everyone should take advantage of these advancements.

Hayles begins this essay by stating various sources and statistics to explain that kids these days are doing more and more screen reading, and less reading of physical texts. Reading in literary genres like novels, plays, and poems in print has declined over the last twenty years, and reading skills among young people are worse than ever, as well. Obviously, Hayles thinks this is a bad thing. She does mention that thanks to programs and initiatives aimed to halt this decline, novel reading among youths has gone up in the last few years. Of course, many people cite the internet as being directly responsible for the decrease in reading ability, and think it should be declared a national crisis. Hayles says that literary scholars would be a massive help in solving this crisis, but seem to be largely ignored despite their expertise in this area.

Hayles continues that the void between print and digital reading is difficult to close, especially for young people. Looking at past solutions that have increased interest in reading, Hayles now explains the idea of close reading. Close reading is a very important discipline, and acts as a widely applicable method accessible to both scholars and students. After close reading, another study called “symptomatic reading” was introduced, though most people seem to be sick of it now; Hayles claims it was too formulaic and predictable to have to longevity that close reading does.

Since we are now fully within the digital age, Hayles notes that to reach kids so immersed in digital culture, it is vital to meet them where they already are; bridge the gap between what today’s youth already know, and what you are trying to teach them. Kids that have grown up with the internet, and are more used to reading digitally than with print, have developed different styles of reading – skimming and scanning being how they are typically used to reading text online, is not useful when it comes to print books. This is called hyperreading, and it may be the reason why kids are reading so much less. There are also functions of memory involved that can affect a kid’s ability to retain printed text.

To point out the importance of maintaining literacy levels, even in a digital age, Hayles gives the example of one study where two siblings – one literate, one illiterate – were tested on their processing and comprehension. The literate sibling was able to better process verbal cues, proving that literacy remains a necessary part of development. Machine reading is also useful, of course, but it doesn’t mean that traditional literacy should be forgotten completely. Close, hyper, and machine reading do overlap in some ways, and present their own advantages and disadvantages.

Hayles provides examples of students being taught their class material using formats that were already familiar to them – social media. This helped improve students’ comprehension of their assigned work, and is exactly what Hayles was talking about when she mentioned meeting today’s digital kids where they already are. To fix this “crisis,” we need to be rearranging our ideas of reading, and how it functions in today’s world.

In this essay Grafton discusses whether or not printed books and the culture surrounding them are truly dead. Some people and corporations would like to think so – universal online archives, such as Google’s library project would like to convince people that brick-and-mortar libraries are obsolete. However, Grafton says that a universal online library or encompassing encyclopedia is not on the horizon, at least not in a way that would replace their physical predecessors.

For a while, Google has been trying to amass an online library of every book anyone could ever want or need to access. According to Grafton, librarians would mostly welcome this resource, rather than seeing it as a sign of the apocalypse. The internet, while useful to many, is still not accessible to everyone everywhere in the world, and has a lot of expanding to do before it can completely take over. And these projects and systems are usually English-focused, leaving out a large percentage of the world’s population and texts. Grafton, using the example of Archibald Coolidge, says that an online-based super library database lacks the vision and drive that traditional book collectors possess. There are many books out of print that Google would be hard pressed to add to their database, and they also seem hesitant to scan old manuscripts into their system, leaving a niche space for physical archives necessary.

In Grafton’s view, we will always have a need for print libraries. Research is changing over time, however, as is reading culture. To keep doors open, many libraries have shifted their image from one of scholarly study to a “public center” for anybody to use, creating friendly spaces that welcome tourists, scholars, homeless people, and average readers. Today’s readers will have to keep one foot in each world; electronic and print. The web can only help a person so much, before eventually pointing back to physical books and libraries.