MovieChat Forums > To Kill a Mockingbird (1963) Discussion > It's a sin...

It's a sin...

posted 9 years ago by carychrysler-65-572512
13 replies | jump to latest

....to kill a mockingbird, as it would be a sin to let books die, in favor of the e-book. The book on which this film is based is literature. I read "Of Mice And Men" on kindle. John Steinbeck, one of my favorite American authors. Now, I don't mind the kindle, the e-book, but as I read Steinbeck's fine words, I felt rather cold. It was as if I had sat down to enjoy a meal of my favorite foods, but without any flavor. Couldn't taste the fried chicken, the mashed potatoes...the e-book is like that. Cold, without soul.

I read To Kill A Mockingbird several years ago. Could feel the book in my hands, taste Harper Lee's words. I can touch a book, smell the pages, set the book on a shelf...love to have books on shelves around me. I can taste Steinbeck's words, too.

No reason the e-book should replace the real paper book. They can co-exist. Please let it be so. Don't allow the book to die.

[–] FoolishCarriage 9 years ago

Amen!!!

[–] Ultimist 8 years ago

Ultimately, it is the words of literature, and not which format they are presented, that are the important thing.

I can understand wanting to hold on to the past, in the form of books with actual pages... but a tree is chopped down for every 50 books that get made... whilst a computer or tablet can hold thousands or even millions of important works on a single Micro SD card.

The difference between a tangible book made of paper, and an ebook, is only in your mind. The words and meaning are still there. I intend no offense here, but it is true.

The problem you mention addresses a problem within yourself, not a problem out in the world.

[–] carychrysler-65-572512 8 years ago

Thanks for your reasoned response. My books do not require batteries, nor an infrastructure beyond my humble shelves, and trees are replanted. I sense a difference in ages here. I was born in 1957. I am not against progress, and I believe physical books can (and will) exist with the e-book. Indeed, I believe they will. I have books on kindle. I agree that the body of a given work remains, regardless the medium. I guess it's the same as when motorized vehicles began sharing the roads with horses. Maybe they'll come up with a way to manufacture paper without chopping down trees.

It's just hard to let go. Peace.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] carychrysler-65-572512 8 years ago

When I said I have the kindle, I meant that I'm willing to embrace new technology. I use the kindle and still acquire/read my paper books. not sure what is hard to understand.

I believe you meant to type "Could have gone" to the library. At least that would be my hope. "Could have went" is to me akin to fingernails on a chalkboard. I was born in 1957, which means I was taught proper use of the English language.

I have ordered many books online. Oh, and I despise "Need to".

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] liscarkat (16530) 6 years ago

The trees that are harvested to make paper for books are plantation trees, grown as a crop for the purpose. Natural forests are no longer mowed down to make books. Electronic books, on the other hand are made largely of plastic, a petroleum product, and contain batteries made of toxic materials that are difficult to dispose of safely. They also require recharging, which requires electric power generation.

[–] JosephASpadaro 8 years ago

I agree with the original post.

Reading an e-book on Kindle is a very different experience than reading the actual pages of a physical hard-copy version of the book.

For the latter, there is no substitute.

The former is cold and clinical. You "miss" a lot.

Again, I agree with the original post.

It's funny: technology is supposed to be taking us steps forward. But, it often seems like it takes us backwards instead.

It's sad, really.

[–] hachmom-1 8 years ago

I was born in 1960. I love books, and have a house full of them but have a Kindle too. I love being able to carry about multiple books, without the weight, especially while travelling.

Even more important is that the Kindle fonts can be formatted. This allows me to read at better font size, without the expense of large print books (often not available in that format), or the struggle with eyestrain with glasses or magnifying glass. (reading is the only thing I need them for(.

I have many of my favorite books in both formats (Including To Kill a Mockingbird). Both formats have their place. But ease of scaling fonts means I shall probably do more of my pleasure reading in ebook format as I get older.

It is not our abilities that show who we truly are...it is our choices

[–] JosephASpadaro 8 years ago

To be fair ... I never gave Kindle a try ... I never gave it a chance.

But the whole idea turns me off.

I often read news stories on the internet, and it's just not the same as reading a physical newspaper.

So, with great literature, I assume that the disparity is all the greater.

I imagine -- as you say -- there are some advantages to Kindle.

But -- on balance -- I myself don't think that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

I must disagree. Over the years I've seen my favorite movies in theaters, on TV, in VHS tapes, on DVDs, on YouTube, and streaming.

The format isn't what matters, it's the work of art itself.

[–] huwdj (4562) 5 years ago

I prefer a physical book. I'll read an e-book and it's useful that so many classics, long out of copyright, are available free online; but I much prefer to carry around a paperback in rucksack or pocket. It's also nice to just fill bookshelves and have them to hand.