Death of Books?

World Enough and Time

Patrick Keeney
March 10, 2021
Books – what are they good for, anyway? They’re bulky, they gather dust, they get frayed, they offer little that can’t be rendered digitally. Yet in the past, wars were fought over the people’s right to read, and spreading literacy became among society’s foremost social goals. Time was when some even risked prison to get their clutches on books they craved. Today, some see signs we’re about to turn our back on all of that. Patrick Keeney considers this civilization-threatening subject in his light-hearted meditation on his own voluminous collection of volumes.
Death of Books?

World Enough and Time

Patrick Keeney
March 10, 2021
Books – what are they good for, anyway? They’re bulky, they gather dust, they get frayed, they offer little that can’t be rendered digitally. Yet in the past, wars were fought over the people’s right to read, and spreading literacy became among society’s foremost social goals. Time was when some even risked prison to get their clutches on books they craved. Today, some see signs we’re about to turn our back on all of that. Patrick Keeney considers this civilization-threatening subject in his light-hearted meditation on his own voluminous collection of volumes.
Share on facebook
Share on Facebook
Share on twitter
Share on Twitter

There has been an outpouring of books and articles predicting the death of the printed book or the imminent end to the Age of the Book. Our transition to a digital culture has, for better or worse, rendered the paper book redundant, as hopelessly out-of-date as cassette recordings, video stores or rotary phones. The paper book, we’re told, is slated for the book museum. It will be gazed upon by future generations with the same bemusement as cuneiform tablets, papyrus fragments or illuminated manuscripts. “The reality is that there is great anxiety that the book might disappear,” declared Maryanne Wolf, director of the Center for Reading and Language Research at Tufts University in Massachusetts, several years back.

If the Age of the Book is to end, it will be much more than a technological transition. For not only is the way we read already changing, the very need to read is receding. Constantly stimulated by an unending stream of images and sounds, prompted merely to click here or copy in one’s credit card info there, today’s digitized individual has ever-fewer reasons to wield the printed word. Auto-completed words and phrases in instant messaging, voice recognition and video communications, meanwhile, make writing ability ever-more dispensable. Perhaps reading will fade from everyday life and return to its historical roots as a quasi-secret language of specialists. At worst, the abandonment of reading could push much of society back into a pre-literate state.

Is the end of the Age of Books upon us?

Were anything like that to occur, it would be tragic on many levels. The unique brain development that is stimulated through reading would also be foregone by future generations of kids. “Human beings were never born to read,” Wolf, a cognitive neuroscientist, wrote in Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain. Reading, she noted, involves the brain rearranging itself to learn something new. And whether we are reading them on screens or on the printed page, books stir our imagination, influence our brain development and transform our inner lives. They form the basis for any kind of intellectual life; they shape civilization itself.

Not just what we think about but how we think is generated from ideas and associations grounded in the books we read. As E.D. Hirsch points out, a child’s early love of reading stands as a proxy for educational achievement, while others explain that reading fosters imagination, curiosity and wonder. As essayist and former editor of The American Scholar Joseph Epstein put it, “In a sense, we are what we read.”

I have no idea what will happen to worldwide literacy, but I know where I stand on the subject. For of the acquisition of books, there is no end. The Canadian physician, historian and bibliophile Sir William Osler once mused that, “It is much simpler to buy books than to read them and easier to read them than to absorb their contents.” Truer words were never spoken.

“…Never born to read”: Author Maryanne Wolf believes fiercely in the neuro-cognitive benefits of reading, but worries that reading could be subsumed in the Digital Age. (Source: pixeIhouse, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Despite my wife’s best efforts to keep my book-buying habit in check, our house is now bursting with books. I’ve never had the inclination to count them, but I guess they number in the thousands. I defend my purchases by boldly asserting that, “If it’s books, it doesn’t count as hoarding.” I’m not sure I believe this, and I know my wife doesn’t. But in this time of pandemic, a well-stocked library is a necessity, not unlike a well-stocked larder or wine cellar.

I admire the aesthetic qualities of finely bound editions, and I appreciate antiquarian rarities, first editions or otherwise collectible volumes. But although I understand its appeal to collectors, as a beautiful object or valuable artifact the book holds little interest. I buy books because I intend to read them. As British journalist and physician Theodore Dalrymple says of his own book-buying habits, I am less a collector of books than an aggregator of books.

Books are relatively inexpensive, particularly if one shops at used bookstores, flea markets and thrift stores as I do. One of the joys of shopping at such venues – apart from obvious fiscal considerations – is the lucky find, perhaps a book that one had always meant to read, or the serendipitous stumbling across a volume that perfectly matches one’s current interests. Bibliophiles are always on the hunt, and unread books in one’s library can quickly amass faster than the ability to read them. As the 17th century English poet and MP Andrew Marvell (a contemporary of Milton’s) wrote, “Had we but world enough and time…”

When new friends visit our house, particularly if they don’t share my passion for the printed page, their natural question is, “Have you read all these books?” The candid answer is a simple “No,” but I feel the unadorned truth requires a word of explanation. I tend to mumble something about good intentions, or how I need many of these volumes for research, or I say something like, “Think of the books I’ve read but which aren’t in my library.”

In moments of cowardice, I even blame my wife, a well-read woman who owns many of the books. Or else I justify my library by quoting Jorge Luis Borges, the Argentine poet and essayist, who said that, “I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library.” If the visitor is still dubious, I pull out Germany’s 18th century giant, Goethe: “Libraries should be like a well-tended orchard, with some fruit ripe for the picking, some fruit maturing on the tree, and other fruit rotting and fertilizing the ground.”

As important as a well-stocked larder or wine cellar: The author in his personal library, numbering in the thousands of volumes and still growing.

Most bibliophiles freely admit their book collecting is a sort of obsession. Thankfully, it has not yet been diagnosed as a disorder by the American Psychiatric Association. The American industrialist Benjamin Franklin Thomas described his grandfather as a “person touched early by the gentlest of infirmities, bibliomania.” Whether we are collecting books or merely acquiring them, there truly is no end.

Perhaps the most comprehensive history of the eccentricities of book collecting is Nicholas Brisbanes’ A Gentle Madness: Bibliophiles, Bibliomanes, and the Eternal Passion for Books. In it Brisbanes documents the careers of various individuals afflicted with this malady. Among the most remarkable was that of Stephen Blumberg, an American who stole nearly 24,000 rarities from 268 libraries worth an estimated US$20 million.

Love or madness? “Book Bandit” Stephen Blumberg stole 23,600 books, went to jail and was interrogated by a puzzled Mafia Don who wondered why he didn’t just focus on stealing diamonds.

While awaiting trial in prison, the now-renowned thief was visited by a Mafia Don. Why, asked the puzzled gangster, would a man of your abilities waste his talents on books, rather than stealing diamonds and gems, which pay much better? Blumberg answered, “I never took the books to sell. The idea was to keep them.” The mobster abruptly ended the conversation. Recounted Blumberg: “He decided I was really crazy.”

Today, our pandemic-induced lockdown brings to mind Rod Serling’s classic Twilight Zone episode, “Time Enough At Last”. In it Burgess Meredith played Henry Bemis, a “bookish little man whose passion is the printed page” but who lacks the time to indulge his obsession. Bemis survives the episode’s subsequent nuclear holocaust and discovers the public library where, miraculously, the books all remain intact. But just as he is about to embark eagerly on his new, uninterrupted lifelong reading program, Bemis stumbles and breaks his glasses. Without them, he is nearly blind. The episode ends with Bemis in tears, proclaiming, “That’s not fair. That’s not fair at all. There was all the time I needed.”

Be careful what you wish for: Burgess Meredith as Henry Bemis in The Twilight Zone contemplating not a world without books, but books without a world.

The moral of this cautionary tale is that we had better be careful what we wish for. As St. Theresa of Avilla is reputed to have said, “More tears are shed over answered prayers than unanswered ones.” Like Henry Bemis, the pandemic has provided bibliophiles everywhere with “time enough at last.” As Rod Serling’s parable teaches, the fulfillment of our desires often comes with a terrible price.

In our case, that price includes the yawning fear that ours might be the last generation to truly appreciate books. If that worry is prescient, not only is my book collection likely to end up in a shredder or incinerator, but its priceless contents will no longer enrich and shape young minds. Yet, despite the cottage industry devoted to modelling the withering of books and even literacy, here I see reason for hope.

Some of my younger friends have told me – using that patient but patronizing register of speech that youth reserves for especially dull-witted older people – that my preference for printed words over reading on-screen is merely a generational bias. They maintain there is nothing inherently different about reading texts electronically. They may have a point. In another of her books, Reader Come Home: The Reading Brain in A Digital World, Wolf weighs the competing evidence and maintains we possess a “biliterate” reading brain, capable of in-depth reading across media. It is a thought-provoking thesis.

That still does not address whether non-written communication will displace the written word altogether. Here too, I’ve encountered reasons for optimism, anecdotal though they might be. The three grandchildren of a friend of mine have been showered virtually since birth with pricey electronic devices and the associated apps and subscriptions. They’ve been bombarded with everything from Mario Brothers to those unsettling products in which education, play, marketing and sales all come together, a seamless continuum from lessons to Lego to credit card. Actual reading is the least of it. These families would appear the very model of the slide towards a post-literate world – prosperous enough to afford all the digital gizmos and hip enough to want them.

Judging by the voracious reading habits the author observes in his friend’s young grandchildren, books might just be preferable – or at least competitive with digital devices – after all.

And yet, my friend has discovered to her delight and relief, all three grandkids easily accepted printed books as soon as they were proffered and now read routinely if not voraciously. One of them likes nothing better than trips with his devoted mom to the public library, where he hunts for new selections on subjects that have popped into his head since the last visit. Another devours hockey books, and a third excitedly recounts every scene from an adventure novel set on a mysterious island. As they read, smartphones and tablets lie scattered, the giant-screen TV is dark and radio-controlled toys sit abandoned. Their young brains are clearly mastering the process of transforming written symbols into a vivid world of sights, sounds, events and plot – existing entirely in their minds, yet as exciting and real as any of the digital stuff.

It’s a joy to watch. And it gives me hope. For if they and others like them keep this up, there could still be a market for my book collection after all.

Patrick Keeney is associate editor of C2C Journal and a visiting scholar at Chiang Mai University in Thailand.

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

Childcare on the Ballot

Political theory suggests that freedom and equity are opposing concepts. Allowing greater individual autonomy is assumed to curtail fairness for the less advantaged, and vice versa. Not so when it comes to the 2021 electoral debate over childcare – one of the few areas of sharp contrast between the two main parties. Peter Shawn Taylor takes a close look at the Liberals’ proposed national childcare system and the Conservatives’ refundable childcare tax credit and finds one option delivers not only greater choice for all parents, but superior support for low-income families as well as the promise of new spaces.

The Sins of Our Fathers

The past few months have shown there’s no shortage of people willing to hurl accusations, issue demands and unleash uncontrolled emotions. Such tactics have flooded political life in our age. By contrast, lowering the emotional temperature, proposing a reasonable way out of the mess and driving toward a real resolution are in short supply. In the third and final instalment of C2C’s three-part series on unmarked graves at former Indian Residential Schools (Part 1 can be read here and Part 2 can be read here), Gourav Jaswal examines how other countries have faced the challenge of national reconciliation, then charts a path for Canada to take.

The Case for the Classics in Alberta’s New K-6 School Curriculum

Kids are heading back to school – much to the relief of millions of parents – but in Alberta they are marching back to a curriculum and teaching mindset bearing the imprint of the previous NDP government’s “progressive” ideology, including the virtual erasure of history. It is an open question whether the current UCP government’s controversial education reforms will proceed. Student Lucas Robertson, for his part, hopes that they do. Robertson has loved classical history since before he began elementary school, and he sees rightness, truth, valid purpose and even beauty in Alberta’s plan to teach today’s kids about ancient people and events. Parents across Canada take note, for the outcome in Alberta could have national implications.

More from this author

Content over Process: Alberta’s New K-6 Curriculum is a Welcome Shift in Educational Thinking

It is clear that “progressives” are intent on rewriting, discrediting or wiping out the past. That context helps to clarify the left’s horror at Alberta’s proposed new K-6 school curriculum. Its fact-based approach to elementary schooling includes the history of Western civilization back to its beginnings, and to progressives, that simply cannot stand. With the curriculum’s comment period open until next spring, the controversy continues to boil. A lifelong educator, Patrick Keeney well knows what progressives have been up to. Keeney sees this as the moment when parents and all those who believe in a genuinely liberal education can take back our schools.

Ricky Gervais' speech at the Golden Globes was one of the moments that saw some push back against the supposed diversity of Hollywood.

Hollywood’s Real Diversity Problem

Some of us are old enough to remember when the entertainment industry’s primary objective was to entertain us rather than indoctrinate or proselytize. If political causes were pushed, it was conducted subtly; open activism was relegated to a few mercurial directors. That, of course, was a long time ago. But now come signs the public has had enough of Hollywood’s incessant preaching. Patrick Keeney notes the recent travails of the movie business’ most famous awards shows and explores what might be done to move beyond an entertainment diet of all-leftism, all-the-time.

George Orwell on the Myanmar Coup

“The whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought”, George Orwell wrote in his famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. “In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” Orwell understood that whoever controls language controls political thought. And such an insight is as applicable to Myanmar in 2021 as it was to Oceania in 1984. Using Orwell as his guide, and relying on his extensive personal contacts throughout the country, C2C Journal associate editor Patrick Keeney takes a close look at reality and meaning in the recent coup in Myanmar.

Share This Story

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

Donate

Subscribe to the C2C Weekly
It's Free!

* indicates required
Interests
By providing your email you consent to receive news and updates from C2C Journal. You may unsubscribe at any time.